Electioncast: Could Catherine West Really Bring Down Keir Starmer?

Summary

Newscast: Electioncast – Could Catherine West Really Bring Down Keir Starmer?

BBC News | May 10, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode of Newscast tackles the shockwaves caused by Labour backbencher Catherine West’s sudden intervention, threatening a leadership challenge against Keir Starmer. The hosts—Paddy O’Connell, Laura Kuenssberg, and Henry Zeffman—dissect whether West is a serious contender or just an agitator, what her move says about the Labour party’s current crisis, and what ripple effects it could have across Westminster. The team also explores historic parallels, the dynamics inside Labour, reactions from unions and party grandees, and the possible consequences for Starmer and his government in light of disappointing recent election results.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Catherine West Intervention: Context and Motivations

• Catherine West’s Surprise Leadership Bid

  • West, a backbench Labour MP, publicly announced she would trigger a leadership contest if Cabinet ministers did not move against Keir Starmer, stating her willingness to stand herself (01:16).
  • Laura Kuenssberg recounts the surreal atmosphere:
    “Catherine West is a Labor backbencher former minister who dramatically... told our lovely colleague Ben Wright on Radio 4 that if Cabinet ministers didn't move against Keir Starmer, tomorrow will trigger a leadership contest by running herself.” ([01:16])

• West’s Call for Female Leadership

  • On TV with Bridget Phillipson, West urges more senior women to step forward:
    “There's nothing stopping Bridget from standing. Why are all the men better than the women?... We do need some senior women to step forward.” — Catherine West ([01:40])

• Motivations and Authenticity

  • Henry Zeffman explains West’s background, linking her motives to recent election losses to the Greens in her North London constituency ([02:51]).
  • Laura underscores that West appears to be acting independently:
    “She does genuinely appear to be acting on her own. She doesn't appear to be doing this at the request of any other leadership contenders...” ([03:42])

2. Can West Actually Trigger a Contest? Numbers, Factions, Realities

• Is There Real Support for West?

  • The Labour rule requires 81 MPs to back a challenger ([04:00]).
  • Laura Kuenssberg shares,
    “We phoned quite a lot of MPs... Some of them said, good for her. Other people said... that she had less chance than Spurs did of winning the league.” ([04:00])

• Leadership Plot Complications

  • Zeffman relays a party insider’s verdict:
    “It's mad, but it's so mad it might just work.” ([05:54])
  • Many MPs who wish to see Starmer gone are hesitant to back West due to tactical timing for preferred candidates (e.g., Andy Burnham) ([06:30]).

• West’s Own Words on Pressure and Timing

  • “When the orderly timetable is provided by the chair of the party, we will understand who are the runners and riders. But at the moment what I am diagnosing is we have a problem...” — Catherine West ([07:32])

3. Labour’s Dilemma: Limbo, Leadership, and Public Discontent

• Widespread Stagnation

  • Kuenssberg describes Labour as “stuck in this horrible limbo,” with ministers reluctant to move but privately wishing for resolution ([08:14]).

• Union and Left Criticism

  • Key unions, including Unite and TSSA, are overtly critical of Starmer.
  • Kuenssberg:
    “Sharon Graham... she’s the boss of Unite... [is] very clear that Kir Starmer... can’t be the person to take them into the next general election.” ([12:28])
  • Henry:
    “The vitriol that they were pouring on him personally is still quite striking to hear.” ([13:53])
  • A joint TULO statement (Labour’s union umbrella) was “really, really stridently critical of Keir Starmer” ([13:53]).

• Starmer’s Response—A Crucial Speech

  • Starmer is preparing a speech focused on the EU and social media, not seen as a radical reset ([11:16]).
  • Kuenssberg expresses doubt:
    “He’s not somebody who’s a brilliant orator... the idea that you can climb out of the kind of incredible defeat like this with a speech... I mean, look, who knows?” ([15:26])

4. Is Changing Leaders Really That Politically Dangerous?

• Historical Perspectives and Recent Precedent

  • Paddy O’Connell asks if changing leaders always damages parties; Zeffman reviews recent cases ([19:30]):
    • Tory switches (May to Johnson, Johnson to Truss)
    • Labour’s decision not to challenge Brown
    • “There is all sorts of absolute nonsense being spoken about fairly recent political history, to be honest.” — Henry Zeffman ([19:30])

• Instability vs. Flexibility

  • Kuenssberg:
    “There’s a massive detriment to changing ministers and changing prime ministers all the time... If you are changing prime minister and ministers all the time, things do not get done in government.” ([21:32])

5. Internal Labour Divides and Big Unknowns

• What Do Labour MPs Want?

  • Are rebels seeking better communication or a total reset of policies and party direction?
  • Zeffman:
    “Do they want a change leader to improve communication or do they want a change leader to transform what this Labour government does? And I think a lot of them still don't know.” ([24:01])

• Organizational Weaknesses in No. 10

  • Starmer’s team lacks permanent key advisers and communications chiefs, compounding a sense of drift and vulnerability ([25:28]).

6. Wider Political Landscape

• Effects of Labour Instability on Other Parties

  • The hosts reflect on the boost for Reform UK and the Greens, and Labour’s failure to capitalise on the Conservatives’ weakness ([27:11]):
    “Labour is in this complete mess at a moment when the country appears to be very interested in the idea of giving power to a party that’s untested...” — Laura Kuenssberg ([27:11])

• Where Did Labour’s Votes Go?

  • Zeffman:
    “It is worth remembering the Conservatives had... some glimmers of hope... But basically the Conservatives are still going backwards.” ([28:25])
  • The vote is fragmenting: Labour’s losses split between Greens, Reform, and others ([29:50]).

• Upcoming King’s Speech

  • Next week’s legislative agenda—already set—unlikely to deliver a surprise radical policy reset ([31:14]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “It's mad, but it's so mad it might just work.” — Henry Zeffman, on West’s gambit ([05:54])
• “Why are all the men better than the women?... We do need some senior women to step forward and to challenge for what is going to be a really difficult two and a half years...” — Catherine West ([01:40])
• “When the hard moves, the hard moves.” — Kuenssberg, paraphrasing Boris Johnson on the ruthlessness of party politics ([15:26])
• “He’s not the kind of person who jumps onto radical ideas.” — Laura Kuenssberg on Starmer ([16:25])
• “There’s a feeling of such jeopardy here, I think, for all the established parties.” — Laura Kuenssberg ([27:11])
• Lighter aside: extended speculation about the King’s Speech—whether it’s written on “vellum” or “old goat” ([32:14–33:57])

---

Timestamps of Key Segments

• [00:38] – Laura/Panel recap Catherine West’s TV intervention and background.
• [01:40] – Catherine West’s on-air challenge to Bridget Phillipson.
• [02:51] – Henry Zeffman’s biography and assessment of West.
• [03:42] – Laura on West’s independence and possible outcomes.
• [05:54] – Zeffman’s “mad but might work” observation.
• [07:32] – West explains her urgency and timing.
• [13:00–14:00] – Union leaders’ critique of Starmer.
• [15:26] – Discussion of Starmer’s chances of recovering with a speech.
• [19:30] – Historical precedents on leadership changes.
• [21:32] – Discussion of the downside of frequent leadership turnover.
• [24:01] – Zeffman: Rebels divided over policy or presentation.
• [25:28] – Number 10’s lack of senior staff and organisational weakness.
• [27:11] – Broader implications for party politics and voter volatility.
• [31:14] – Preview of King’s Speech and government agenda.

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a nuanced, inside look at the Labour Party’s existential moment, dramatized by Catherine West’s audacious but probably quixotic leadership threat. The hosts weigh the genuine alarm inside Labour, the party's deep divisions, and the potential fallout for Keir Starmer—with sharp commentary on precedent, union pressure, and the unpredictably fragmented British political landscape. While West’s manoeuvre is as much about exposing rifts as expecting victory, the episode makes clear: Labour’s leadership crisis is real and unresolved, with old certainties no longer holding.

---

For more, listen to the episode or join the BBC Newscast Discord for ongoing political chat.

Transcript

[Paddy O'Connell]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

If the world were like a Sleep number mattress, everything would adapt for your comfort. Because as your life changes and your body changes, Sleep number mattresses adapt and shift to give you personalized comfort night after night. And now everything's on sale during our Memorial Day event. Save up to $1,200 on mattresses for a limited time to experience a whole new world of comfort. Visit a Sleep Number store or go to sleepnumb Sleep number To a good life sleep.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Henry, you saw this encounter which Laura staged on television. What? What happened?

[Henry Zeffman]

Yes.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Stage anything?

[Paddy O'Connell]

Well, you did. You invited two people to sit next. Hang on, Henry, what did you see?

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, I saw Catherine west not just talking about her own leadership bid for that is what it is, but inviting various members of the cabinet to launch their own, including Bridget Phillips and the Education Secretary who was at that time sitting next to her live on BBC One on Sunday with Laura Kunsberg.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

It was quite surreal, I have to say. So if you have been living under a rock or newscasters are coming to

[Paddy O'Connell]

this this weekend or on the radio

[Laura Kuenssberg]

or in the radio. No, I was just gonna explain. So Catherine west is a Labor backbencher former minister who dramatically late afternoon told our lovely colleague Ben wright on Radio 4 that if Cabinet ministers didn't move against Keir Starme, tomorrow will trigger a leadership contest by running herself. And she was on TV this morning sitting next to Bridget Phillipson with her direct message. And it was a bit ox.

[Catherine West]

There's nothing stopping Bridget from standing. Why are all the men better than the women? We do need some senior women to step forward and to challenge for what is going to be a really difficult two and a half years between now and the general election. And also to take us into that second term.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Just. She's really laying down the gauntlet. Bridget Philipson. What do you say to her? I love you dearly, Catherine, but I just disagree on this one.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I mean, we're gonna have to get to grips in this edition with the absolute ripple, no absolute bombshell that's been her intervention. But also who on earth she is is a relevant question on Sunday's newscast.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Newscast, newscast.

[Henry Zeffman]

From the BBC, humanity's next great voyage begins.

[Paddy O'Connell]

We are in the midst of a rupture.

[Catherine West]

Nostalgia will not bring back the old order.

[Henry Zeffman]

Six, seven, six, seven.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yeah, it's supposed to be me as a doctor.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Daddy has. Has also a special connotation.

[Henry Zeffman]

Thinking about it like a panto helped. Do we play music now or what do we do?

[Paddy O'Connell]

Hello. It's Paddy in the studio and it's

[Henry Zeffman]

Thor in the studio and it's Henry at home.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

And let's hope this isn't as awkward as the encounter between Bridget Philipson and Catherine west who apparently are friends and they like each other very much. So Catherine West, Henry, tell us about her.

[Henry Zeffman]

She is an MP for a constituency in North London which, and I think this is relevant information, saw the local council, Harringay, have Labour lose lots and lots and lots of councillors to the Greens and Labour lose control of that council. That I think is relevant. She's been an MP since 2015. She's broadly on the left of the Labour Party, but I don't think she's a sort of massively factional, denominational figure and she had a brief stint as a junior minister in the Foreign Office, didn't last beyond K Starmer's first reshuffle, quietly retreated to the back benches and then yesterday became very loud and may well have bust open the leadership taboo which was kind of, you know, persisting in the early aftermath of the results.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

And she does genuinely appear to be acting on her own. She doesn't appear to be doing this at the request of any other leadership contenders. She's been very tight lipped about who she would like to see. But you know, this morning her point is this, is that under Keir Starmer Labour is heading for an absolute disaster and therefore they need to pull the plug now get on with it. Stop having this kind of merry go round of speculation that has been going on not just since these election results but frankly for months and months and months. What we don't know yet is whether or not There will be 81 Labour MPS tomorrow who are prepared to put their names to to this effort to trigger a contest. There is also the possibility, but I think it is an outside chance that she will be so wowed by A K Starmer's big speech tomorrow that she changes her mind and thinks, ah, fine, I won't do this after all. There is also the possibility, which also still seems slim, that some people in the Cabinet will actually go, you know what, we just can't have this. So at the moment, as we are recording at 10:38, it's seems that the Cabinet is well described to me by one junior minister as being very tepid, failing to step up to the gravity of this moment. But there are lots of things that still could happen. But in terms of the numbers, I suppose the most pressing question is whether or not she really has a support on the back benches and Paddy, it's really hard to tell. You know, we phoned quite a lot of mps yesterday to try and find out and some of them said, good for her. I think this could trigger the moment. Other people said, as somebody rather cruelly joked, that she had less chance than spurs did of winning the league.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I can put it this way, that if you put up or shut up is what she's effectively managed to do. Henry. Because it's one thing to want him gone, but if this is a freelance leadership bid which is not attached to one of the main rivals, all of whom have been mysteriously silent, it's not a very easy choice for a disgruntled Labour backbencher to go at the wrong time, in the wrong way in the destination that they want to go to. So you could make a case she won't get 81. What do you think of my rambling efforts?

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, look, what I think the best way it's been characterized to me was a sort of influential, long serving Labour person said to me yesterday, it's mad, but it's so mad it might just work. And I think that's right, actually. I mean, I think there is a really wide range of possible outcomes here. This might sound like fence sitting, but it's really not. I think it is possible, possible that Catherine west ends up not Even with the 10 MPs that she claimed she had backing her, but I think it is also possible, and this is an extraordinary position for the Prime Minister to be in, that by the end of tomorrow she will have Atmps backing her. I really do think that is possible and I think we need to prepare newscasters for that possibility. And I am speaking to people in The Labour Party MPs, ministers in some cases who are outwardly loyal to the Prime Minister, but actually do not want the Prime Minister to carry on and believe that there are enough of their persuasion who will sign Catherine West's papers if indeed she does put them in. I think the other nuance, to be clear of, is that there are people who want Keir Starmer out who won't sign Catherine West's nomination papers and their issue is that her timetable is too fast for Andy Burnham. So there's all sorts of doublespeak here that we need to kind of interpret for newscasters and I appreciate that's very frustrating for them. But the one person really who's speaking plainly this morning is Catherine West.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

That's absolutely right. And. But she. Where she was not playing is I asked her if anybody from rival contenders camps had phoned her and said, please hold off.

[Catherine West]

When the orderly timetable is provided by the chair of the party, we will understand who are the runners and riders. But at the moment what I am diagnosing is we have a problem, we have to move quickly to fix it because otherwise it will lead to uncertainty and we need to install a new leader who can take us towards beating reform in the general election to come and give us a second term.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Did that happen, though? Have people tried to put pressure on you? From Andy Byrne of stage, I've had

[Catherine West]

lots of interest, but I haven't actually formally asked for support until I've heard what the Prime Minister says and I've got that timetable from the chair of the Labor Party, which will give us all a sense that there is a direction towards the change of the party.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Ok, Catherine west, thanks very much indeed for coming in and speaking. But as Henry was saying, I mean, I think that's absolutely right. It was a minister further down the ministerial ranks yesterday who was saying to me, look, I'm not going to resign in order to back Catherine, but actually I really hope that this moves things along because Labour's just stuck. They're stuck in this horrible limbo. They were in limbo before the May election. They all kind of look to me, as, you know, that big lighthouse coming in the distance on the coast. Is that going to be the moment when we're going to manage to move? Then the election results have happened. Is this the moment we don't know. And ascended said it may well be by the end of tomorrow. That actually there is a. There is a contest ongoing, but right now the kind of rival camps don't seem to be pushing it to a conclusion. I would say, as I said yesterday when we were recording that I'm expecting to be a statement from Angela Rayner sometime this afternoon. Mysteriously, it disappeared around the time of Catherine West's intervention. It's still supposed to be coming today, but we'll see.

[Paddy O'Connell]

So we are in British political history, will be said to have gone in chapters and this is a multi prime Minister chapter we're in. It has happened before, it happened in the 1920s and it's happening now. David Cameron said, when we have the Brexit referendum, whatever the result, I'll stay, I'll stay. Then he left. Then we had every mpa, every Prime Minister available. But one of the people who was instrumental in getting rid of Boris Johnson, I was told by a intelligent colleague on my Radio 4 program, was Catherine West. Henry. She. I was told, hang on, she had A role in kebabbing Boris Johnson.

[Henry Zeffman]

That's exactly right. People will remember, particularly because there was a lot of chat about the Privileges Committee in the last few weeks, that Boris Johnson was ultimately or ultimately had his career as an MP ended, let alone as Prime Minister, by the Privileges Committee investigation into what he had and had not said about Downing street parties in the House of Commons. And the crucial answer he gave was in response to a question from Catherine west at Prime Minister's questions.

[Catherine West]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing street on 13th November?

[Henry Zeffman]

Prime Minister. Mr. Speaker. No, but I'm sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times. So, yeah, I mean, she, she appears to be shaping up to have an outsized role in British political history for someone who, you know, as it stands, has been an MP for a decade. You know, not many people will have heard of her until yesterday and did a sort of relatively brief stint in a relatively junior ministerial role.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Beware Catherine West.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I don't want her looking in on my career. So the Prime Minister's at work on a speech tomorrow. This is another speech. I just wonder what Keir Starmer is doing in the face of this ultimatum.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Well, I mean, you're right. Preparing for a speech tomorrow where he's going to talk about why he wants a closer relationship with the European Union. Not quite sure why Downing street believes that would be the kind of panacea for reform voting, Brexit, voting parts of the country, but it is the kind of thing that makes some Labor MPs happy. He Also, we think he's going to say some more things about social media and kids, which we've been talking about for years. And many campaigners think the government has been incredibly slow on taking any action. The government's also got, we talked about it yesterday. They got the King's speech on Wednesday, which is when they get to trumpet hahaha, the new laws that they want to pass. But I don't think that there are that many people knocking around in the Labor Party who think that Kirstar is suddenly going to, you know, jump out of a cake and be a completely new man. And that, that's, that's the problem when you get to this is people in the Labor Party who are worried, that are worried because they think that K Sama, not just that he's not done a good enough job, but that he doesn't have the capacity to be different. And that's a view on about benches. It's a view in government. It's a view also among increasing numbers of the unions. And, you know, yesterday we had Sharon Graham on the program this morning. Who doesn't. Well, she won't say if she has a candidate in mind, but she's the boss of Unite, which is a huge union. She's very clear that Kir Summer is. Can't be the person to take them into the next general election. She also wants new plans and more radical plans from the Labor Party, but she's very clear that he can't do it. And we spoke to another couple of union leaders yesterday. So Mariam Eslam Dus, who's the head of the tssa, and Steve Wright from the Fire Brigades union. Now, they both are of the left of the party and they want to see more radical proposals, but they were also just really clear that Keir Starmer's characteristics and his relationship with the public makes it not possible for him to go on. You only have to look at reforms. Campaign messaging, much of it was centred around getting rid of Starmer because he is deeply, deeply unlike, unlikable to large sections of the public. Politics isn't complicated. Simple messaging like that really cuts through. And labor can't ignore the reality of its own peril if they don't do something about the status quo. We need to concede to reform taking power.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I'm happy to attend a meeting with the Prime Minister, but I think actually what we've seen over the past couple of days is people want to see change. They've not seen it over the last two years, and that there needs to be a roadmap for a transition for a new leader, in my eyes, as

[Henry Zeffman]

you said, Laura, those are union leaders from the left of the Labour Party. They've never been particular fans of Keir Starmer. Nevertheless, the vitriol that they were pouring on him personally is still quite striking to hear. I mean, I was also very struck, and Sharon Graham referenced this on your program by the Tulo statement that was put out on Friday night. Now, TULO is the organization of all of the affiliated trade unions to the Labour Party, and it includes trade unions which have generally been very supportive of Keir Starmer's leadership, like the gmb, like Unison, like USDOR and. And others. And it was really, really stridently critical of Keir Starmer, demanding an urgent meeting with him to discuss how he can change. And, you know, that struck me as another pretty bad omen for the Prime Minister. I mean, I think when it comes to what you were saying about this speech that the Prime Minister is going to be giving tomorrow, I think the risk for the Prime Minister is that it makes things worse. And you see it. You've seen it with more than me. With Prime Ministers when they're in a tailspin is that sometimes they get to a position where everything they say just makes things worse. I'm not saying Keir Starmer is in that position, but I've spoken to MPs over this weekend who think he may well be. Because if he doesn't offer something that moves beyond the sort of thing he might have said last week, if he'd given this speech last week, which at some point was the plan, then I think a lot of MPs are going to be very, very frustrated and considering in a way that they would never have entertained a few days ago, putting their name next to Katherine West's name.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I mean, it's as Boris Johnson said. Remember when he was so cross that he had to go, that when the hard moves. The hard moves. Now, the letters might not fall off the back of the set when Keir Starmer makes his speech, but if you were in Kermer's team, you would be feeling very, very nervous about this speech. He's not somebody who's a brilliant orator. He's not known for his sort of dazzling talents at public speaking. Sometimes he can pull it out the bag. At conference this year, there was a lot of anxiety about his leadership even back then in the autumn, and actually he then made a speech that was pretty well received. But the idea that you can climb out of the kind of incredible defeat like this with a speech, with one speech, without something enormous and new to say. I mean, look, who knows? Maybe he'll stand up and say, actually, I think we should go back into the European Union, which would make lots of people in the Labour Party feel very happy, and it would be certainly a way of grabbing the conch. But. But the signs are he's not the kind of person who jumps onto radical ideas.

[Paddy O'Connell]

The reason why this is such a fork in the road is because there's a counterblast. Don't change the leader if you haven't got a change of policy. And let me just wrap together four things. The observer, the Sunday Mirror both ran editorials critical of Keir Starmer, but saying, do not change Prime Minister now. It's not good for. For the country and the voters don't like it. Then let me talk about a television program, Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday, and a Broadcasting house on Radio 4. Let's run together. Bridget Philipson, who's in the government, in the Cabinet, talking to you, and Lord Blunkett, who was in the Cabinet, seen as a Labour grandee, both saying that this is not the time for Labour to turn in on itself.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I just do not believe that the message we should take from these elections is that we ought to spend time as a party amongst ourselves, arguing amongst ourselves, fighting amongst ourselves. We do need to tell a better story, we do need to deliver faster. You know, people in 2024 wanted to see a better country. They voted for change and they don't feel that we have delivered on that change. And that's what has to. What we have to, you know, what we have to understand.

[Henry Zeffman]

My line is very clear. Let Keir make his speech tomorrow, let's get through the King's speech, let's try and calm things down a little bit and let's not run around like headless chickens. You mentioned Catherine west earlier. I think she's completely misguided. Firstly because she's the wrong person. Secondly because the timing is entirely wrong. And thirdly, she misunderstands the constitution of the Labour Party. The Cabinet can't get together as she's suggesting, and somehow choose a new Prime Minister. That's not how it works.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

There is such frustration and anger with the country. One of the reasons people got very cross with the Conservatives was that they kept changing Prime Minister. Except that changing leader for the Conservatives is arguably what meant they got to stay in office for 14 years, because when things went terribly wrong, they got a new boss. So it's not necessarily the devastating takedown of the idea of changing the leader that loyalists to Keir Starmer believe it is. You know, the answer is it depends if they change leader. And who knows, maybe it would be Aladdin or the Dalai Lama or whoever knows who they would get if they change the leader. And actually they were better at communication, they ran a more effective government. We know. We just don't know. This is all so uncertain. It could be an absolute calamity. And one minister was saying to me yesterday, the worst case scenario is if we have a leadership contest now, we might have two before the general election.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Have you been reading our newscasters email?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

No, I haven't. Not yet.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Possible you've just stolen his view. Oh, God. Received wisdom is that voters punish parties that change leader. I want to know if this is borne out by the evidence. The Conservatives had a big boost when Boris Johnson took control. Did voters really punish the Tories in 2024 because they changed leaders so many times. Or was it more about the choices these leaders made? Love the podcast have been listening since 2017. Blah, blah, blah, says Chris Henry. What is the evidence?

[Henry Zeffman]

I think it's a great point from Chris and it's something I've been thinking a lot as we've heard this line trotted out by supporters of Sakir Starmer. I mean, let's look at the leadership changes the Conservatives made in their 14 years. David Cameron to Theresa May. Well, that was enforced by the public really, via the Brexit referendum, so that kind of doesn't count. Theresa May to Boris Johnson. Well, the Conservatives had just finished, I think, fifth in the European elections and had no sign that they knew how to break the Brexit lockjam. And five months later they won quite a big landslide, albeit not by Keir Starmer's standards. So obviously that one went well for them. Boris Johnson to Liz Truss. Obviously disastrous. But is the contention of Keir Starmer and his allies that the Conservatives should have stuck with Liz Truss so they didn't change leader? Again, I don't think in their heart of hearts, not that they have the Conservatives best interests at heart, that's really what they would say. Then perhaps look at the Labour Party and think about two people who appeared in Downing street to the bafflement of Labour MPs yesterday, Gordon Brown and Harriet Harmon. Well, towards the end of Gordon Brown's government, Harriet Harmon, if you believe Andrew Rawnsley's account, tried to stage a coup but was talked out of it. The Labour Party stuck with Gordon Brown and they lost the general election. Arguably, if they'd changed leader, they'd have been able to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats rather than Conservatives. So I think there is all sorts of, and this is politicians prerogative to warp history for their own argumentative ends, but there is all sorts of absolute nonsense being spoken about fairly recent political history, to be honest. And I think we can call it out, I think.

[Paddy O'Connell]

But you remember the lettuce. I think that it's about the public's appetite for a short tenure. I think that there is pushback here about how about we have a Prime Minister who lasts two weeks. I do think the public actually do have a view about what the country looks like abroad. We used to joke about Italy. In my lifetime they had so many governments. Have got more governments than pasta.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I know, but they've got sun and spaghetti. So I mean that like, you know, how bad could that be?

[Paddy O'Connell]

Well, it's just that I think the public of all stripes, there is a point at which they want the system to work.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Correct. And there's of course a massive detriment to changing ministers and changing prime ministers all the time. Of course there is, you know, and Conservatives would freely admit many of them. There's two big fat problems. There's the perception problem about instability and what the financial markets think of that and what the public thinks of that and all the kind of image and reputation of that. There's also just this physical thing. If you are changing prime minister and ministers all the time, things do not get done in government because they're spending all their time doing politics rather than making plans, let alone actually making sure that plain plans happen. And while all this politicking goes on, massively urgent problems like where are they going to find money to pay for defense if they agree that we need loads of more money to be spent on defense? You know, how are they going to sort out the problem of caring for the elderly? How are they going to sort out the government debt? All of those things they get put more or less on hold.

[Paddy O'Connell]

And then what's happening in the devolved home nations is they're saying, look at Westminster. Yeah, look what it can't do. You vote for us, the Plyde and snp, we're going to go tackle the cost of living, we're going to cap food prices. SNP's talking about doing, yes, we're going to give extra child care. That's what Plyde's saying in Wales.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Although I think the snp, I think this is a cunning ploy and I'm sure they would disagree with this. But, but let me just explain. I think they probably know that they don't have the power to do that, but they can say they want to do it. Westminster government will then say, you don't have the power to do it. Then they'll be able to say to voters, ah, we lovely Scottish government wanted to cut your food bill, but those meanies in Westminster won't let us do it. And that's why we need to have more power and independence.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I mean, there's such an interesting argument to be had about capping food prices in one part of the UK versus the other. Because if you imagine H on the border, I could go into Hoyk or Barrack or Berwick, go Tempe more and if I go to Hamilton, up the board, up the way. So, Henry, the point.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I just wanted to say Hoic, didn't you?

[Paddy O'Connell]

I did want to say you just

[Laura Kuenssberg]

wanted to say Hoyk properly. But you did say it properly.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Thank you.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

So credit. And you didn't do it with an accent. So double points.

[Paddy O'Connell]

So, Henry, look, the, the, this is what the pull together is. Labour MPs are crunching the gears of everything we've mentioned. Are you punished for changing leader? Should you change leader? Is the math there? Is this the right time? So this, this all happening today. Do we think they're all on the WhatsApp groups? Do we think they're calling each other? Are they at Curry Club? Are they meeting in Andy Burnham's house? What's happening?

[Henry Zeffman]

I think they're absolutely all on WhatsApp to each other. Non stop. Absolutely. As they digest this. I mean, I think the, the nub of the issue that actually all of this comes to the question of changing leader versus the instability of changing leader. Too often the question of radical policies being pursued in Wales and Scotland, by contrast to England. It all comes back to a question which I've raised on newscast before, which I think even some of those labor mps most eager for a change can't yet quite answer, which is do they want a change leader to improve communication or do they want a change leader to transform what this Labour government does? And I think a lot of them still don't know. Catherine west, at least in her initial interviews, seems to suggest that her view is that it's about communication. But there are other labor mps who are looking at the rubbles of what were once labor citadels and are now green or reform or some other patchwork. And they're saying we need to completely reimagine what the Labor Party stands for. That's the contribution made slightly surprisingly, this morning by Josh Simons, former Keir Starmer ally. We had him on newscast a few weeks ago. He says they've got to change leader, but it's not about moving left or right, it's about completely transforming how the state operates. So that is one perspective here. I just think the fact that all of this is pouring out into public just suggests that it's getting harder and harder for Keir Starmer to contain as he awaits making that big speech tomorrow.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Yeah, it's like he's showing a big kind of bag of snakes, isn't it, that he's trying to hold in his hands and they're all wriggling around. I mean, it doesn't feel like it's in control, does it? I mean, it just doesn't feel like it's in control. And remember, number 10 is still in a state where they've got a. An interim chief of staff, an interim Joint Chiefs of Staff, who are civil servants, not political appointees, they still don't have a new director of communications. I'm not saying these things are the end of the world, but I think part of this equation is that Downing street remains, from a political point of view, quite underpowered. So I don't think that they are necessarily in a position where they can take control of this very effectively. I mean, that's the. You know, they don't have these. Maybe that is what Gordon Brown and Harriet Harmon are going to try and do. But the flip side of that is not everybody's happy about it. Someone in government said to me yesterday, they've literally just got the most meddlesome people to come into government and it's going to be a right pain.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I remember reading very senior Conservatives in the papers and hearing privately from senior Conservatives that they wanted labor to work. They didn't want the political agenda of Labour, but they felt after the chaos of the last few years under the Conservative rule, that it was good for the country that Labour could come in and go, ah, don't worry, we're going to do this. Conservatives could argue, I wish you wouldn't do that. But instead what's happened is that they're not able to pursue the agenda that they originally stood on. One of the biggest things they now say they did, they said in the manifesto they wouldn't do, or at least they didn't put in the manifesto, which was raise the benefit rules about how many children, at which point benefits are capped and when.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Fuel allowance is still the biggest thing that people mention all the time as being this sort of original sin that turned many members of the public against them. You know, that still gets raised by the public all the time. Any MP will tell you that, any minister will tell you that privately. And you're right, though, Patty, There is a kind of moment, and we heard a lot from a whole range of politicians on the program this morning, you know, reform, absolutely cockahoop with how they've done. The Greens are pleased with how they've done, too. The Lib Dems are pleased. But, you know, the sort of established parties look at this and think, hang on a minute, labor is in this complete mess at a moment when the country appears to be very interested in the idea of giving power to a party that's untested and to a man that a lot of people think is a hero, Nanto Farage, a man who a Lot of people find somebody to have very many concerns about to a party that a lot of people think are brilliant because they say, tell it how it is, but a party that many other people just think are divisive and shouldn't be anywhere near power. So this is not a sort of frivolous thing where of labor all fighting amongst themselves. Well, that's okay because it's, you know, standard politics. It'll all kind of resolve itself. There's a feeling of such jeopardy here, I think, for all the established parties think that they're operating in that context.

[Henry Zeffman]

To return to what you said, Paddy, I think you're right that the Conservatives wanted, in a weird way, wanted labor to succeed. I think actually a lot of Conservatives believe that's one of the reasons that reform UK has come for so many Conservative areas is that the Conservative brand is still very poor and the labor government has become quickly very unpopular. And therefore people are looking for an alternative to the, the two party double act which has governed Britain for so long. I mean, I think whether that holds up because it is worth remembering the Conservatives had a tonight as well on Thursday, some glimmers of hope in terms of controlling certain councils in London. But basically the Conservatives are still going backwards. Exactly. Still, you know, still on course to be routed further at the next general election, even beyond their worst result ever, which they had in 2024. But I think one of the things that's going to be really important as the sophologists and political scientists dig through these results over the coming weeks, months, years actually, is where votes flowed in which direction. So, okay, labor might have lost council seats to reform, but was that because labor voters stayed at home? Was it because they went to Greens? Was it because they went to reform? Was it? All of that really matters, and it actually really matters to the question of what any new leader, if there is one, should do. Which direction should they tack in? And I think that's going to be a big part of the debate over the next few days.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

And I think the truth may be for Labour is actually their votes went in all sorts of different directions. You know, and again, in a traditional system where you've basically got two parties and maybe a few around the edge, or, you know, the SNP doing well in Scotland or maybe applied, you know, doing bits and pieces in Wales or the Lib Dems or a smaller third party, well, it's been relatively or comparatively easy for the reds and blues to work out where things are going now. There's this Rubik's Cube it's incredibly difficult. And, and as you say, you know, the number consciousness, the cephos, the sophologists who are the people who understand this stuff, have got a hell of a job trying to work it out. But I don't think the message is going to be one way. So it's just incredibly difficult for any party to work out what, why what is happening is happening. And also in a way, is it really because of their ideology or is it because we're such as it is or just because we're in this moment where people are really, really hacked off because they felt skinned for a long, long, long time and they think that government per se isn't working into this

[Paddy O'Connell]

rides the King's Speech on Wednesday, is it, Henry? They've got to come up with a program. So I mean, that is normally, this is my government, the King stands out, will stand there and say what is my government intends to do? On a list of up to 30 things I think we had last time, didn't we? So do we know what's going to be in the King's Speech?

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, yeah, I mean, that's actually one of the, I think slightly difficult dynamics for Keir Starmer here, is that I'm sure there'll be a few surprises here and there, but basically the way that a King's Speech works is that they've been negotiating within government. I mean, Cabinet ministers literally bid to the leader of the House of Commons, Sir Alan Campbell, for a place in the King's Speech. They've been doing that for months and months and months. So this is not some new, I mean, unless something crazy is going on in government this weekend, this is not some new radical agenda being drawn up this weekend specifically in response to the election results on Thursday. This is the agenda of this government that we broadly know about. So there will be legislation on the eu, but it will be to continue negotiations in the vein that we already know that Keir Starmer wants to. Unless he changes that mandate on Monday, there'll be legislation on jury trials. Well, that's very controversial. There'll be things that we already know the government is doing, being given legislative effect. And again, I just wonder whether for a lot of labor mps, that's going to be anywhere near enough.

[Paddy O'Connell]

And I don't know if you can change it because isn't it already written on goat skin? Didn't it used to be written on ghost vellum? Goat vellum or vellum?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Is vellum always vellum?

[Paddy O'Connell]

No. Well, vellum isn't goat, but I Thought it was written.

[Henry Zeffman]

All right. Okay. Sorry.

[Paddy O'Connell]

No, no.

[Henry Zeffman]

Maybe vellum is just the legislation. Sorry, it's not the case.

[Paddy O'Connell]

No, venom is.

[Henry Zeffman]

Or that's written on vellum, isn't it?

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yeah.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

It must be a Radio 4 documentary somewhere about this. I'm sure.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I'm pretty sure that the traditional monarch speech is written on a piece of old goat.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Poor old goat.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Well, the goat's long gone. Anything to add?

[Henry Zeffman]

Office?

[Paddy O'Connell]

No. You won't go?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

No. How are your plants?

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yes. So at the car boot sale in Essex, I bought a large amount of bedding plants which I've left in their plastic bag, but I've tipped water on so they could thrive.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

So are your lizzies getting busy?

[Paddy O'Connell]

So certainly wet in this cold. They're probably dead. I'll give you some updates.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Oh, good.

[Paddy O'Connell]

The editor's checking if the goat. If it was written on goat. You're nodding. Go on.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

It is written on goat.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Is it? Can you speak instead of just laughing at the editor?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Do you mean goat skin? Can we just be clear? It's like not written on the side of a goat like a Sharpie on its kind of fur.

[Paddy O'Connell]

The editor's going to opine we're better end this podcast, I think.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

That said, I tell you what, let's Adam the challenge that tomorrow Adam will tell you clarify in incredible detail whether or not vellum or old goat

[Henry Zeffman]

is.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Is the. The backdrop. Not the backdrop, the piece of paper or whatever it is for the King's Speech.

[Henry Zeffman]

Great.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

So Adam, you old goat, over to you. Don't miss that episode.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Goodbye.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Goodbye.

[Henry Zeffman]

Goodbye.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Newscast.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Newscast from the BBC.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Thank you so much for making it to the end of Newscast. You clearly copyright Chris Mason. Ooze stamina. Can I gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds? Don't forget, you can email us anytime. It's newscastbc.co.uk and if you would like to join our Discord community to talk about everything newscast related, there is a link in the description of this podcast and don't be scared. It's super easy to click on it and then get set up. Or you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-2390 480 and I promise you we read and listen to every single message. Thanks for listening to this podcast.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Bye.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Foreign.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Always rise to the occasion for summer vacation planning because early gets you closer to the action. So don't be late. Book your next vacation early on VRBO and save over a hundred and twenty dollars. Rise and shine. Average savings 141 select homes only.