Adam Fleming (1:25)

Oh, so you went for surnames over this half of this?

Sarah Montague (1:28)

We weren't so presumptuous. I'm just.

Adam Fleming (1:30)

Okay, sure.

Sarah Montague (1:31)

Well, you're an old. I call you old timer.

Adam Fleming (1:33)

I'm a veteran podcaster. I was very tickled to see that Keir starmer got exactly 18 minutes of coverage on the Chinese news last night. Laura Bicker was telling me from Beijing. So I'm thinking we could maybe give his trip to China about. I'm aiming for 13 and a half.

Alex Forsyth (1:49)

Or is that some sort of proportional calculation?

Adam Fleming (1:51)

Well, no, just. I think it's just. It's just a bit of a target to aim for, isn't it? Nice little challenge.

James Landale (1:55)

Not a lot.

Adam Fleming (1:56)

I mean it is. You've been on a podcast.

James Landale (1:59)

No, I know what you mean.

Adam Fleming (2:00)

In time.

James Landale (2:00)

I mean for Starmer to get on.

Alex Forsyth (2:02)

Yeah.

Sarah Montague (2:03)

Yes.

Alex Forsyth (2:03)

Well, how many is that half an hour program he got?

Adam Fleming (2:05)

Yeah, it's half an hour and it's the main like state sponsored news.

Sarah Montague (2:08)

And it sounds like it was more than either Mark Carney or Emmanuel Macron got when they went.

Alex Forsyth (2:14)

That's interesting.

Sarah Montague (2:15)

Quite hard to obviously to be a judge on that.

Adam Fleming (2:17)

Intriguing. James, you must have been to China as a journalist a few Times.

James Landale (2:21)

I have a few times, yes.

Adam Fleming (2:23)

Any memorable tales?

James Landale (2:27)

Yes, we all took the burner phones. You know, there's nothing new about that. And there are always problems with comms, getting a VPN to work and things like that. I mean, I could. The first time I ever went to China was a very, very long time ago. And I can remember, you know, even then, you know, if you were thirsty, you would say to your, your friend in, in the hotel room, I'm really thirsty. Would you like cup of tea? Yes, I'd really love cup. I, you know. Yes, cup tea. Right. And everything. Then five minutes later a nice person would turn up at the door with a freshly boiled. Because they've been listening like that and they'll be. And so you could always. And quite often you can go in and you. There would be some sort of air duct or something and then literally there would be a, you know, sort of 1970s style microphone with a little tripod that sort of sticks with a very long thick cable. That's exactly what it would be in the. And you know, so the surveillance is certainly not new.

Adam Fleming (3:16)

Well, Chris Mason used his burner phone to send us this little message from Beijing.

Chris Mason (3:21)

Hello, newscasters. My rather parky Beijing. You know, when I'm doing the television news, they don't like things like hats but flipping out. I'm putting it back on because it is cold. I'd have the snood on as well if I could, but it'd get in the way of the microphone. So day two of the Prime Minister's trip to China. This was the big day really, meeting the President, meeting the Premier, the second in charge politically, all of the talk about warming up the relationship between the UK and China and a couple of case studies the government would point to in doing that. So this idea of visa free travel for trips of under 30 days coming soon. We don't have a date yet, but the government hopes it'll be signed off as soon as possible. And then halving the tariff, the import taxes on whiskey that is sold from the UK into China from 10% to 5%. What else can I tell you newscasters? What would you like to hear about a trip that goes a little beyond what you might hear on the main television news or radio news or whatever. Ah, yes, food. So we've had some fantastic food here. It's a wonderful kind of privilege, really lucky to get to go on trips like this. We've just been in a great restaurant down the road. However, one of the things on the Spinning Susan thing, lazy Susan, that's the phrase in the middle of the table was duck head. Duck head. You've actually got to say that quite carefully, haven't you? You've got to eat it quite carefully as well because it's incredibly chewy and is something of an acquired taste. The rest of the dish was absolutely fantastic. I'll talk to you soon.

Adam Fleming (4:55)

Well, there we go. It's like MasterChef Beijing Edition. Sarah, there's been a lot of focus today on this bit of the Prime Minister's trip about the business deals and this huge bus of CEOs that the PR Prime Minister took with them. Obviously, they went on a plane first and then a bus around Beijing and you. You were speaking to some of them on the World at One.

Sarah Montague (5:13)

Well, we've done. And we've done quite a lot of it through the week. But today, having spoken to business people yesterday, today we sort of thought we should speak to some of these cultural figures because actually about a third of the 60 or 50, 60 delegates are people from culture and sport. The head of what you call it, table tennis England, the rsc, there's a whole. Some museums visit Britain. And we were just trying to get a sense of what they were doing and kind of what the. The idea. And I guess it's sort of soft power as well. And it sound. They're all clearly having a blast. I mean, you know, to hear Chris there sounding quite excited about the jolly. I know it's never a jolly. We've all been on those trips where you people calls it a jolly and you think it's not. It's a hard work. But it does sound like they're having a complete laugh such that I almost said, I sort of said, are you. I said, so what are you singing at the back of the bus? And she couldn't reply. This was the head of table tennis. And I.

Adam Fleming (6:09)

And I said, basically suggesting.

Sarah Montague (6:11)

Yes, yes, they've been singing at the back of the bus. That's what it sounded like.

Adam Fleming (6:13)

But, Alex, isn't that interesting that the fact that there can be a British trip to China where there's some levity, some jollity, which suggests it's not that China's a massive security challenge or a massive security risk or a big problem for Britain.

Alex Forsyth (6:27)

Yeah.

Adam Fleming (6:28)

Opportunity.

Alex Forsyth (6:29)

I think that number 10 will be quite aware of the potential optics of around that, because if you listen to the messaging that's come from Down Street, Kissed Armor, everybody else, of course, that they are talking quite openly about their desire to warm up the relationship or to Improve the links that might lead to better trading relationships or economic benefits or whatever. But they are also caveating that quite carefully with the notion of being clear eyed and aware of the security implications and some of the challenges in the relationship with China, not least around the things that we're familiar with about human rights. Karma says he's raised those in his discussions with the Chinese Premier. So I think number 10 maybe won't want the pictures of them singing on the back of the bus to be the ones that come out. Because while they're being honest about their intention to improve the relationship with Beijing, they are also trying to be cautious about how that might be perceived. When there are quite a lot of people here in the domestic political scene in the UK who are sounding great big warning bells about potential ramifications of getting too close to China, but that.

Sarah Montague (7:23)

Trying to reconcile the two between. You want to do business and yet you have to have this cautious is something we've been trying to get on top of. And I spoke to Greg Jackson, the boss of Octopus, you know, huge company, energy company, and I sort of said to him, so are you on a burner phone? He said, I'm on a burner phone on a VPN with an eSIM, but they have huge business dealings in China. And he was incredibly excited about the innovation in sort of green tech that he wants to do more work. And I find it quite hard to imagine how you can sign off sort of multi million pound deals with somebody when you can't, you can't even have your own home phone there because of the lack of trust.

Alex Forsyth (8:04)

And the thing about that, the sort of dilemma around this and what we don't know and what we haven't really heard spelled out clearly from government and there might be reasonable reasons for that, is what that means in practical terms, how you improve the trade links, but also be conscious of the security risks. Because think about some of the previous decisions about Chinese roles in British infrastructure or Huawei or, you know, they're the tangibles. Are we happy with this or not? And I think that's still a question.

James Landale (8:27)

That's absolutely right. The issue here is not should the British government have a relationship with Beijing? Of course it should. Should it go on visits? Yes, of course it should. It have, yeah, I know, but, but the vast majority of this sort of, you know, the analytical world says yes, you know, it makes sense to have a relationship where the pro, where we have a problem with the British policy, and this is one that has been throughout successive governments, is they all have a version of an acronym. The current acronym is, you know, is, is you cooperate on some things, you compete on others and you challenge on others. And the problem with that is that that's not a policy, that's a description of the status quo. Because what it doesn't tell you is, right when a Chinese company says, I want to invest in a massive wind farm project in the uk, does the British government give it the green light or not? Do we consider that the economic benefit outweighs the security impact? Because although yes, we're getting a nice new wind farm that can create lots of energy for us, the fact that these things require constant updates, that means that gives the Chinese control over whether or not they should be renewed if there were a conflict in the future. The same thing is about the investment decisions, about a massive electric vehicle plant to be built in the UK or not. That's where the sort of, you know, the decisions are really going to come. Not the sort of the jolly.

Sarah Montague (9:50)

In Beijing, Richard Dalov, who we spoke to, former head of MI6, he raises this idea that at some point in the future China could switch off your electric car if you have, just as the tractor makers John Deere did when tractors in Ukraine were taken by Russia and they were able to just effectively flick the switch on them so that they couldn't work. And his argument was, you've just got to be aware of this. But Greg Jackson at Octopus said another thing which, and I was thinking, how.

Alex Forsyth (10:19)

Do they do this?

Sarah Montague (10:20)

He talked about, we are trying to work out ways to separate the firmware from the software so that we can buy, you know, the equipment from them, but our software will allow us to prevent sort of, or to limit the control. And that's, you know, that's where he says, I'm sitting in meetings across from, you know, my Chinese sort of business partners trying to work out, work this out.

Adam Fleming (10:43)

But what's been interesting today is working out how much of that, the deal stuff is rhetoric and how much of it is genuine deals. So for example, when on the political level, visa free travel for British tourists to China, fairly soon, that sounds like a big opening, although we don't know.

Alex Forsyth (11:00)

When or how, you know, and also.

Adam Fleming (11:02)

Many other countries have had it before us. But then there's going to be what exploratory talks about doing a feasibility study about maybe in a future year doing a trade deal for services. That, that's to me is, that's just words, isn't it?

Alex Forsyth (11:15)

Yeah. And this is exactly to James's point in the point that I was trying to make about. There is, there is a big difference between setting out an approach and how put that approach into action and the decisions that you make around that. And I think that is the bit that we're still unsure of now. It may be that Keir Starmer argues, you know, this is the first time that a Prime Minister's been in eight years. This is the beginning of a dialogue. Those things are going to be bottomed out and still to come, but it's a clear sign of intention, despite the fact there is some opposition to the fact that he's even signifying what he is by this visit in the UK from some quarters. But there are still lots of substantial questions. And if you think about the one tangible decision they have taken recently, which is around the Chinese Embassy in London where there was the decision to allow them to open it, that did attract a lot of controversy and we have yet see how that plays out and you know what that then means in the future. So I think we're very clear on what Keir Starmer says he's trying to achieve. We don't yet know how he's actually going to put that into action and what some of the implications of that may or may not be.

James Landale (12:06)

Alex, I've got a question, you know, with your sort of political hat on. What is the, the current state of the sort of what I call the hawkish element of the debate in Parliament at the moment? Because there always used to be a mixture of kind of, you know, the securitate sort of security focused people, the, the, the kind of economic nationalist group and then plus the sort of more human rights concerned group and together across parties that made with a sprinkling of kind of, you know, ex Brexiteers who've now made China their new focus.

Adam Fleming (12:39)

And of course some of those people are sanctioned by China, correct?

James Landale (12:41)

Some of them are saying, but that was actually quite a large number of people. Is that, do they, do they operate as a sort of collective or is.

Alex Forsyth (12:48)

It kind of solid block? I mean there is certainly a block within a block. The people that you talk about, the people that have been sanct who've been highly vocal and characterized largely as China hawks for some time, they absolutely still exist and are there. But I think what is interesting now is if you look at back at past governments and the relationship they've chosen to pursue with China from the kind of golden era under David Cameron and George Osborne and then Boris Johnson, who was slightly more circumspect in some ways around that Huawei decision and the kind of infrastructure investment from China, now you've got a Conservative party. So if you just take it from that perspective under Kemi Badenok, who is coming out very strongly and said, I don't think this is the right time to be having that kind of dialogue with China. And that's quite an interesting shift in the political dynamic within Parliament right now.

Adam Fleming (13:28)

And James, just going back to our little quip about. Oh, Keir Starmer got 18 minutes on the Chinese news last night. When you watch it, it looks like the red carpet has literally been rolled out. Tour of the Forbidden City. Big long banquet bilateral with Xi Jinping that goes on for longer than was billed. Is that Keir Starmer getting an especially warm welcome compared to other people? And if so, what's in it for Xi Jinping to do that for a little Britain?

James Landale (13:53)

No, it's not that unusual. You know, the red carpet soldiers the trip to the Forbidden City. You know, that, that is, that's the tour, you know, that's, that's, that's what you get.

Adam Fleming (14:01)

I'd get if I went on holiday with no visa.

James Landale (14:03)

Exactly.

Alex Forsyth (14:04)

You get that.

James Landale (14:04)

Anyway, look, but it's an interesting question. What, what do the Chinese get out of it? First of all, you know, they love normalization. They love this idea that China is not an outcast, that it is not somehow on the, the outer reaches of the international system. So anything that says, you know, here' just normal relations, you know, tick for them. Secondly, the uk, the reason it gets a fair sort of, you know, whack is not because we're massively economically important to the Chinese. We're not. But we are seen as a key ally of the United States and China has an absolute interest in peeling us and others further away from the United States. So anything that furthers the narrative that somehow America is this new unreliable, wobbly ally compared to those solid, stable, reliable, predictable Chinese is a message that the Chinese are very, very keen to promote if at all possible. And then thirdly, there are specific things that they, the Chinese would like to get from the uk. A lot of the education, the life sciences. You know, there's some of the technical stuff in services which they will, as they do, they, they, they welcome, they engage with, they trade with, they copy and then they squeeze out. Because the, the thing to remember is the overwhelming Chinese strategy here, and they're very open about it, is that they want to be more economically reliant. So they, they openly say, we do not want more exports from the UK or from other countries. Ultimately, China's long term game is to be self reliant and the way you do that is by looking for all the areas where you've got gaps. Go in there, engage, trade, copy, and then do it all yourself.

Adam Fleming (15:53)

And then Alex Kiyosama is headed, so he's heading to Shanghai now as we speak, and then he's going to pop into Japan for a flying visit to Japan, where they're in the middle of a snap election, which actually seems like quite a weird thing to do. And also, I mean, I'm hoping he goes on a weird Japanese game show as well.

James Landale (16:07)

That's great, but that's, that is strategic, that visit. That is not just a kind of, oh, if we're there, should we do it? No, you're not. That is a very, very clear message by the UK to other allies in the region of which Japan is a major ally, regardless. Who, who's the current Prime Minister that, you know, the, the way that the UK is still very much in that camp with the South Koreans and everybody else, you know, just touching base to say, we, the UK hasn't had its head turned by, by all the allures of Beijing. We're still in the same sort of space. So that they've probably made that decision, even though there's political.

Adam Fleming (16:46)

It's like, it's like travel insurance for going to China.

Sarah Montague (16:49)

Exactly.

Adam Fleming (16:49)

You pop into Japan.

James Landale (16:50)

Yeah.

Adam Fleming (16:50)

Although as you said, it's not popping in. Right, James, you're going to do a lot of talking in this episode because now we're going to look at Iran and I'll let you have a gulp of water. But while I read a Donald Trump truth social post, which is quite long, I might not read out the whole thing. It says a massive armada is heading to Iran. It is moving quickly with great power, enthusiasm and purpose. Now, when I first saw that, I thought, oh, is that the help he promised to the pro democracy protesters who he was supporting last week? And then you read on and you're like, no, it's about Iran's nuclear weapons program. So how is it that last week Donald Trump is offering help to the protesters and then this week he's trying to clamp down on the regime's nuclear ambitions? What's going on?

James Landale (17:29)

Well, with your usual acuity, you've put your finger on the key issue.

Adam Fleming (17:33)

You've rolled out the red carpet for it.

James Landale (17:35)

Thanks. You're absolutely right. The American line has changed. Changed. At the height of the protests, Donald Trump said, you know, the US is locked and Loaded and help is on its way, and then announced that because the Iranians had allegedly agreed not to hang hundreds of protesters, that the Americans stayed their hand. The fact that all the, the vast majority of America's allies in the Gulf were going, don't do it. You cannot use our airspace, amongst other things, you know, played a role as well. But anyway, you're right, the line has changed because now the Americans are arguing to, to the Iranians, right, we want to deal. We want to, we want to. Let's, let's talk again about enriching uranium. We want you to, you know, new curbs on that. We want you to hand over that. Or remember all that highly enriched uranium that went missing last June during the bombing? Well, the Americans still want to get their hands on that, as does the rest of the world. The Americans are also saying, we want you to impose new curbs on your ballistic missiles. They're also saying, we want you to make new commitments to stop funding militias in the region, I. E. The Houthi is the Hamas and Hezbollah, et cetera, et cetera. At which point, kind of sort of, you know, everyone's going, okay, where do we get to that? But, and so then people are saying, okay, is that all just cover? Is it cover in the same way that with Venezuela, you know, the drugs thing was cover for actually taking control of the oil? Is this discussion about nuclear, which, as you say, suddenly come out of nowhere again, is that cover for finding some way of supporting regime change without being explicit about it? Now, the problem with that is, as we know, regime attempts at regime change through bombing. 50,000ft doesn't have a great track record in, in military history. So you're absolutely right to put your finger on the fact that there is uncertainty about American intentions here, and that's causing quite a lot of uncertainty in the region.

Adam Fleming (19:33)

I mean, Trump is giving himself options, isn't he? That's what he's doing at. That's the point about sending the aircraft carrier. It's not to use it now. It's in case the situation changes.

James Landale (19:41)

No, I spoke, doesn't feel constrained this morning. He said, I hear all the cautionary notes, but, but they said you don't deploy that amount of hardware without at some point using it.

Adam Fleming (19:53)

And the thing brings some momentum as well.

James Landale (19:55)

Absolutely. And, and, you know, if some, if suddenly somebody starts going taco, taco, taco. And Trump responds to that.

Adam Fleming (20:03)

You mean the whole thing.

Chris Mason (20:07)

You know.

James Landale (20:07)

But, you know, what is absolutely true is, is that there's an awful lot of diplomacy Going on.

Alex Forsyth (20:12)

On.

James Landale (20:13)

There are an awful lot of countries in the region talking to the Americans saying, don't do it, don't do it, don't do it. Because they're, because A, because they fear a wider conflagration. B, because they, they think that the Americans might have enough hardware in the region to protect American assets, but won't have enough to protect Gulf assets, I.

Alex Forsyth (20:32)

E. Iran could respond.

James Landale (20:33)

Iran countries. Correct. Iran could hit Saudi, as it did, remember, in 2019. It could hit the military base in Jordan if it accuses Jordan of taking part. You know, Saudis has been very, very clear telling, telling the Iranians directly, you know, no, our airspace is not going to be used because the Iranians have said very explicitly that if America attacks, they are going to hit back against the Americans. Not just against the Americans, but also anybody who facilitates them as well. Now, that's part of the height and tension.

Adam Fleming (21:01)

And then there's all the commercial shipping going up to the.

Alex Forsyth (21:04)

I mean, I'm just totally fascinated. I don't know if you know the answer to this, but of course, there are all of the immediate and very real concerns of potential ramifications for the region. But on the American domestic political front, you know, you've got a US President who was all about kind of America first, and some might argue this is still an America first policy, but with recent memory of US Interventions and all of the things that came as a consequence, I think most people would argue not always successful. Like, is the American domestic public going, this is what we want our president to be focused on, whether it is the real motivation of regime change, whether or not there is a genuine concern about nuclear, whether or not it was always about trying to support those who are protesting against the regime is, you know what I mean? It's. Where's the sort of motivation from the political, domestic perspective from.

James Landale (21:48)

That's a very valid question. And as we saw with Greenland, the. When the polling in the US over any military adventurism in Greenland, you know, was pretty, pretty low, I think with Trump that, you know, in the American political sphere, there's been some discussion about, you know, distraction from other issues, Minneapolis and things like that. There's also, I think, you know, if there's any sense of threat to US national assets in the region. I mean, Marco Rubio was very clear last night when he was giving evidence to this to, to Congress that there are, you know, and he 30 to 40,000 US troops in the region and that, you know, their core priority of the deployment that was being made was to protect.

Adam Fleming (22:29)

Let's bring things straight back to home now. And Alex, this week's British politics is a tale of two Andes. I'm gonna.

Alex Forsyth (22:35)

I've got one in my mind. I'll hold on. Street in Burnham.

Adam Fleming (22:38)

Yes.

Alex Forsyth (22:38)

Is that who you mean?

Adam Fleming (22:38)

Yes. Let's do Andy Burnham first. So after he got blocked by the subcommittee of the NEC from even running to be the candidate in Gorton and Denton, he put out some quite good natured tweets over the weekend. Then there was a third one that was a bit. And then there was a fourth one which was even more. And then he was on BBC Radio Manchester today and didn't hold back.

Andy Burnham (23:00)

Some people just think they can say what they like to the media. And why do they do it? You're asking me? They do it to denigrate the character, impugn the integrity of elected politicians. They did it to West Streeting not so long ago and it's almost like the stock in trade of Westminster. But the thing I want to get over today, and I give great credit to the Prime Minister for backing the Hillsborough Law that I brought to Parliament and obviously that brings in a duty of candour on public servants. Some of these people are paid by the public purse, but in my view, anybody paid by the public purse does not get licensed to lie. And in the aftermath of all of this, I'm not going to be sort of bitter and I'm going to be out there campaigning in the by election, but I am going to call that one thing out.

Adam Fleming (23:43)

So Andy Barnum saying he's not being bitter, but sounding quite bitter and saying he's not going to call out the Prime Minister, but calling out the Prime Minister's.

Alex Forsyth (23:50)

Well, he's calling associates who brief. That's what he was having to pop out. There is the people who do lots of briefings and we know that there has been a particularly active briefing scene in recent months and the most recent kind of iteration of that was a bit of a fallout from that decision by the NEC when there was this thing going round about. Was Andy Burnham told in advance that if you put your name forward then you're not going to get through? So was he kind of chucking his hat in the ring knowing he wasn't going to have to follow through? He firmly denied that, came out and said, absolute rubbish. That's just not true. But this is, I think, what led to this thing about all of the briefs that have been going around about it and his fairly passionate criticism of that bit. It's I mean, it's interesting, isn't it, because Andy Burnham is now very much trying to say, and he does this regular phone in a radio Manchester every week. Today's was the first time that he had really addressed in full what had happened about all of this. And he was very much trying to say, I'm a team player, that this was never about personal ambition. I thought it was the right thing to do for the party to put my hat in the ring because I would have stood the best chance of winning. We know the argument from Keir Starmer and the other people on the NEC who thought he shouldn't stand, which is costly, mayoral by election. Labour Party doesn't need that right now. All got to pull together behind the scenes, despite all that message of unity. You can just get the sense that isn't quite the case, is it? I mean, I think there is still quite a lot of frustration, anger and a bit of bad blood bubbling around the place as a consequence of everything that's happened over this.

Adam Fleming (25:10)

It does seem to me, though, this idea that was doing the rounds at the end of last year, that actually if somebody was going to strike against Starmer, they might actually do it before the elections in May.

Alex Forsyth (25:20)

Well, some people who are up for election, who aren't fans of Keir Starmer, were hoping for that. Yeah, it might increase their chances at the election. That's only one faction.

Adam Fleming (25:27)

Yeah, that's gone away.

Alex Forsyth (25:30)

Yeah. I think. I think, honestly, I mean, it's always a bit. It was a bit of a hard, unscientific measure, but I think if you take the conversations we were having in the run up to Christmas, when it really felt that things were kind of boiling about Keir Starmer's leadership, it does feel that since then that things have calmed a bit. And for all of the people who do express frustration at Keir Starmer's leadership within the Labour Party, this is. And the people that were point to the polling and the people that will say he, according to the polls, is unpopular with the public. There are other people who are advancing the argument and quite loudly in some quarters, that it would be madness to indulge in a kind of leadership contest at this point, point to what we've seen from other parties who did that and what they would say was the electoral damage that it did to them. So I think, you know, and. And certainly at this point, when they are still only 18 months or so in kind of hefty election win, so those voices are pretty loud and clear as well that want the Introspection to stop. Whether or not that means it actually will is a whole other question, of course.

Adam Fleming (26:28)

I mean, Sarah, it's just worth noting how strange it is in British politics to be less than two years into a Prime Ministership that was won by a landslide, to be talking about his imminent replacement. We're so used to it now that it just is like water off a duck head back or a duck's head. It is odd, actually.

Sarah Montague (26:49)

Yeah, I mean, it really is. But they were quite lucky this week, weren't they? Because then on Monday, when everybody might have been talking about it, suddenly the Tories take over, or at least Reform UK do.

Andy Burnham (27:00)

Yeah.

Adam Fleming (27:00)

And also in the Tories, it was split down the middle, or not down the middle, split somewhere. Because you had Suella Braverman defecting to Reform and then you had the other Andy, Andy street, former mayor of the West Midlands, setting up his new group, trying to move Kemi Badenok to the centre, even though Kebbi Badenoch seems to want to move in a more. More reformish direction.

Alex Forsyth (27:18)

Well, yeah, I mean, so it was. It was Andy street, former West Midlands mayor, and Ruth Davison, former Scottish Conservative leader, who did this, setting up this new group, Prosper uk, which they say was about trying to win back to the Conservative Party the politically homeless, as they see it, more centrist voters. So the kind of people, for example, and is an example who might live around the south or southeast of England, that perhaps look towards the Liberal Democrats rather than the Conservative Party, and this was their argument that we need to. To not abandon that cohort and find a way to win them back. Kemi Badenot then gave a speech in the wake of the defection of Suella Bravman to Reform and all of the other defections. And my reading of that speech from Kemi Badenoch was this was her trying to sort of assert her authority over the party after this run of defections of senior figures. She was sort of shrugging her shoulders about the defection, saying, look, if you don't like it, leave. You know, this is what I'm about. If you don't want to be part of my club, off you trot. That was sort of the message. But what was interesting was that when I and others put to her. Her what. What therefore are you saying about this sort of Ruth Davidson, Andy street movement when they're saying, hang on, be careful not to go far too. You know, not to go too far in one direction, that you alienate this group of voters? Cami Badenot was pretty clear she Said we're a party of the right. You know, she said, I, I welcome what they're saying. Ruth Davidson and Andy street, they're being supportive. But she was very clear, I'm the leader of the party, we're a party of the right. This is the direction that we're headed.

Sarah Montague (28:40)

And it's very bitter, isn't it? That's what really struck me this week, because we, we did Tim Montgomery, off the back of Suella Braverman's defection, who had, When Robert Jenrick defected, he had owned up to the fact that he had been in conversation with Robert Jenrick and he said that when that came out, the messages that he was getting from friends or former friends in the Conservative Party were clearly just, I mean, very, very sort of angry, bitter messages. So he suggested that, you know, there are plenty in the party who would sort of think, you look at the numbers, you look at the stuff, stats, the voting possibilities. These are two parties that probably, if one of them wants to get into government, they need to be talking to each other. And from the conversation we had with him, it sounded like, this is going to be really hard.

Alex Forsyth (29:30)

Robert Jenk. What happened with Robert Jenrick was the sort of point at which the notion of any sort of alliance was scuppered because of the way that the Robert genre defection played out. I, I just would have the one caveat, I know that politics feels, you know, kind of, kind of constant and we are clearly in a period of huge political flux and have been arguably for a bit of time, but we are still three years away from the next general election. And as things stand, as things stand.

Adam Fleming (29:56)

Well, all we've got time for is me to say, Sarah, thank you. Thank you very much, James, thanks to you.

James Landale (30:01)

Thank you very much indeed.

Adam Fleming (30:02)

And thanks to you too, Alex.

Alex Forsyth (30:03)

Pleasure as ever. Newscast, newscast from the BBC.

Newscast Outro Host (30:07)

From one newscaster to, to another, thank you so much for making it to the end of this episode. You clearly do, in the words of Chris Mason, ooze stamina. Can I also gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds? Tell everyone you know and don't forget, you can email us anytime@newscastbc.co.uk or if you're that way inclined, send us a WhatsApp on +440333 01239480. Be assured, I promise you, listen to everyone.

Helena Merriman (30:52)

If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed, hundreds killed. But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merryman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.