Loading summary
Transcript114 lines
- [00:00]
A
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
- [00:06]
B
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 Merriman, 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.
- [00:42]
A
Laura, where do we begin?
- [00:44]
C
Hard to know, isn't it?
- [00:46]
A
The Prime Minister is in the biggest trouble of his life.
- [00:50]
B
Correct.
- [00:50]
C
And I think we could go, oh, my goodness, there's all this big swirl and sprawl, which is true. But we are really discussing, as you were discussing on the radio this morning and as we were discussing on the tv, one central question. Can Keir Starmer go on? And if he can, for how long?
- [01:06]
A
All on Sunday's newscast, newscast, newscast from the BBC.
- [01:10]
D
Fat Boy Slim and me in the classroom doing our violin lessons.
- [01:13]
C
I was the tattletail in the classroom.
- [01:15]
A
Can I have an apology, please?
- [01:16]
D
I trust almost nobody that daddy has.
- [01:18]
E
To sometimes use strong language.
- [01:20]
F
Next time in musk.
- [01:22]
C
I feel dulu with no salulu.
- [01:24]
G
Take me down to Downing Street. Let's go have a tour.
- [01:27]
A
Blimey.
- [01:29]
C
Hey, it's Laura in the studio.
- [01:30]
A
Hello, it's Paddy in the studio.
- [01:31]
G
And it's also Joe pike in the studio. Hi, guys.
- [01:33]
C
Young pike, how nice to have you with us. Hello. So it's been a very big 24 hour, 48, 72 weeks of news, but today, I think you where we were and all the Sunday newspapers are really focusing on this issue of Keir Starmer's authority. We know he's in a hole. How might he plan to get out of it? So this morning you spoke to labor grandee, veteran, former minister, and somebody who's very well respected in the party, David Blunkett.
- [02:01]
A
Yes, former secretary. And he said Home Secretary. He said, Morgan McSweeney's got to go.
- [02:08]
C
So the chief of staff of the Prime Minister, someone absolutely central. You can't overestimate how key he's been to Keir Starmer's success in getting to number 10 in the first place, or indeed how important he is behind the scenes. David Blunkett, someone who's well respected with a big voice in the party, has explicitly said he should go.
- [02:26]
E
My view now is that he's. He needs a new Chief of Staff. He needs an opening up of the roots to him so that people can reach him and he can hear what people are thinking and feeling and that they can become part of the answer. Everybody's running around like headless chickens as though there's only one answer and it's supposedly to get rid of the Prime Minister. What about all of us pulling together?
- [02:53]
A
I'll come back to that. But you have just called for the departure of Morgan McSweeney.
- [02:59]
E
Yes, I did so in November. I think my view has hardened since then in terms of a refresh. And look, I'm looking at history. Whenever there's been a major crisis for a Prime minister and there's been many of them over the years, including ones who are now remembered with great affection, there's had to be a rethink as to what's gone wrong. I've said before, say now, go back and take a look at who gave you advice and who turned out to be right. And that evaluation is just looking at the evidence. And I used to do it. If people were really good and they gave me good advice, it, even if I didn't want to hear it, then I would rate them. And if people continue to give you the wrong advice or you're listening to the wrong people, then you can do something about it.
- [03:53]
C
Pros and then do the cons of.
- [03:55]
G
Getting rid of Morgan McSweeney. I think the pros are a scalp means that Keir Starmer can perhaps try and draw a line under this problem because McSweeney is so associated with Mandelson. Mandelson, seemingly a mentor to him over the last few years and also an advisor at key moments. I think some worry that Mandelson had a role far beyond US foreign policy, and removing the link to that previous sort of unofficial advisor might help Keir Starmer. The downside is that he's been so central to Starmer's political brain. He is Starmer's political brain, according to some, that without him could Sarma be in trouble? And who is going to replace those faculties?
- [04:48]
C
And if you think about what Keir Summer might think about his value, someone in government was saying to me, well, look, I'm convinced that actually Morgan and Keir will still leave on the same day. They are so bound together. And if you think of the last few weeks, and this was someone listing what they saw as his accomplishments, he managed to get Donald Trump to sort of apologize and walk back those offensive remarks about British troops in Afghanistan and NATO. He was the one who managed to stitch up the NEC and block Andy Barnum from standing as an mp. If Andy Barnum was standing in a by election in two weeks time, we would be having a very, very different conversation. This weekend.
- [05:25]
A
I hadn't joined that dot and suddenly it's been moving so quickly.
- [05:29]
C
Yeah. And if you think about those, you know, the two key big things for Keir Starmer and you could say, well, Morgan brough me those. What did the people who are calling for him to go ever do for me? Well, actually, what they've been doing is complaining from the moment I walked through number 10. So the, the, the, the cons are significant, but the pressure is such on the Prime Minister that there is, as you say, there's that sort of need, or there's a perceived need that the backbenchers need to be given something and the Chief of Staff so often becomes a kind of lightning rod. Right. I mean, it's very convenient and helpful to have a wily, smart Chief of staff for a Prime Minister to have somebody smart in their corner. It's also very helpful because there's someone who can be chucked over the side when you're under big political pressure, because.
- [06:12]
A
The timing is such that you'd think that you, if you don't do well in May, as the governing party, you make these changes in May.
- [06:18]
C
Yeah.
- [06:18]
A
Not February.
- [06:19]
C
Yeah.
- [06:19]
A
Because who would want to lead into May, given what the polls say is going to happen in May?
- [06:24]
C
Well, absolutely. And if you think of the people who might be the contenders, we'll probably come on to that in more detail in a minute. But it doesn't suit the main contenders right now to go for this for various different reasons, some of which we touched on yesterday. But will Star move to get rid of McSweeney at the moment? Despite Joe, you've probably had the same huge phone flurries in the last few days. You know, everyone's like, oh, what's going to happen? Something huge is going to happen. Is he going to go? Is he not going to go? He's more going to stay in the job. Pat McFadden was explicit this morning. He's a very close ally of the Prime Minister, Also ran the election campaign alongside 1M McSweeney. He was definitive that this should not happen and they also told us it won't make any difference. David Blunkett, for example, in the last few minutes has told our colleagues on Radio 4 that to move on, the Prime Minister should move on his Chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney. Would that be a Way forward. Some people believe that's part of a solution for you.
- [07:18]
D
I see no point in that whatsoever. In fact, you know, I think if the Prime Minister stays there, I don't think that would make any difference at all. And to call for changes of staff, I've seen this before, I don't think it makes a difference. I think the Prime Minister should continue with what he's doing. He's focused on the cost of living. He wants to deliver for the British people. We've had some signs of that that nobody knows about because of the stories we've seen. But we've had better than expected growth. We've got NHS waiting list falling, we've got the Governor of the bank of England saying inflation will come down to target this year, probably another interest rate. These things will feed through during the.
- [08:03]
C
Course of the year we're focusing on. And if we, you know, there are around only around half a dozen Labour MPs on the record saying that they want a change of leadership. But in private, you and I both know there are many, many people in your party who think that Keir Sammer cannot be the man to lead you into the next general election. If we can show viewers just a flavour of what backbenchers have been telling us. I mean, saying it's 10 terminal, it's done, it's over, I think he's finished and personally, I want him gone. I know that's not what you want, but something surely has got to give. Whether it's a change in strategy or a change of staff or are you just going to carry on as you are and hope somehow it'll get better?
- [08:44]
D
No one would want the week that's just happened. You know, as I said, our first thought should be with the women who were victims of all this. I'm realistic enough to know, politically, you know, what the damage is to the government, but I do think he should carry on. I do think he should keep delivering.
- [09:04]
A
What was his mood? You've known him for a very long time and he was instrumental in the 1997 New Labour victory.
- [09:11]
C
Yeah. And Pat Mufadden then worked in number 10, of course, alongside Peter Mendelssohn. He then was his deputy, his number two at the Business Department department during the financial crisis. When we've seen some of the messages between Peter Manelson and Jeffrey Epstein having been written in all their jaw dropping detail. I mean, I, I think Papa hadn't. I have to say he seemed genuinely pretty shaken by everything, actually, that we've seen and learned and read about. This week, I mean, he told us about his last conversation with Peter Mandelson, which he said was in November when he told him to have the victims of Epstein in mind. But I, I thought for someone who's, you know, a very experienced and wily politician, he called himself an old stager. I wouldn't use that phrase about Patman Fadden, but he's a well respected and very experienced politician. And, and, and I, I felt talking to him, he seemed genuinely quite shaken. Joe, what did you think?
- [10:01]
G
I think deflated is is one word you could use. Obviously he's somebody who is put up on your program, Laura, because he's loyal, because he's very experienced. He can sort of dead bat things. But this wasn't a man trying to deny there was a problem as you sometimes see at these moments of intense crisis. Instead, I thought he was actually trying to seem as more open, more honest, trying to level with Labour MPs and trying to logically make the argument about why they shouldn't get rid of the Prime Minister. And I think that was so insightful and it was gripping television because it was such clear confirmation that they know this is really, really difficult.
- [10:48]
A
One of the things that strikes me is that this is the heart of the Labour Party of today New Labour. Peter Mandelson was one of the architects of the New Labour project. Pat McFadden traveled with him all the way. Gordon Brown coming out on the radio saying the country's been betrayed by Peter Mandelson. We are going back a whole generation of Britain's left. The dirty laundry is being washed all over between what the Labour Party actually is. So in looking at the rivals who are circling the job, they're all briefing against each other. Again in the papers today, someone allies of Angela Rayner in the newspapers saying I'd be very worried if I was Wes treating about what's going to come out that's in the Mandelson papers. And then the allies of Wes treating are saying Angela's little helpers are just trying to distract from her own tax scandal.
- [11:41]
C
And if you like, that's essentially a whole rehash of the same soft left versus playwright left. Now we're treating would probably say, oh, I'm not just a Blair, right, but you know, he's definitely somebody who's seen as the modern version of what would be considered to be player New labor modern, more comfortable with the private sector. Angela Rayner would certainly seen as the soft left, closer to the unions and all the rest. And that whole row is being re Litigated. And if we do get into a leadership contest, that will again be the argument. And a bit like the Tories used to do over Europe before Brexit, kind of, they all blew each other up. It's that same kind of two corners of the party, two sides of the family going at it. And that's a kind of a bit of a taste of what a leadership contest might be like. And that's why, frankly, you know, there are people in the Labour Party who are horrified by the prospect of a leadership contest. You know, the consensus is, I think it's fair to say, and I think it's important to say to newscasters the consensus right now, which could change, but the consensus is that Keir Starmer is not going to be the person that leads them into the general election. It's different to saying every single person thinks that, but I think it is important and fair to say that's the consensus and it could change. But that's why then there is this focus on who next and no one's ready.
- [13:06]
G
Andy Burnham is not in Parliament. Andrew Rayner has not sorted out her tax affairs. Wes Streeting has not got the whiff of Peter Mandelson off his reputation. And I think in Pat McFadden on your program today, Laura, of course you saw him being deflated, maybe partly because this project he's devoted so much of his life to, the sort of Blairite project, now looks really damaged and tarnished because the Mandelson web is so broad, because his sort of political tentacles touch so many people involved in that project. Is he thinking, look, this is gonna. Gonna damage the people who would be next? I'm not saying that Pat McFadden would definitely be a Streeting supporter, but you'd think their politics would be similar. And after this week, fairly unfairly or unfairly is we're streeting in a. In a far worse position. If you're gonna going to see a sort of a leadership debate in a few months time, maybe after the May elections, that friendship is going to be brought up, those photos could be brought up, and that's very difficult for him to handle.
- [14:14]
C
I think it won't be though, until we see the publication of everything that's come out that we actually know really what we're dealing with. Of course, right now it suits the allies of Angela Rayner to go, oh, oh, look, Wes treating, he was always big mates with Peter Mandelson. We should say that we're Stretting, amongst others in the party, has said he feels absolutely betrayed and appalled and let down and has definitely tried to distance himself no longer from Peter. Yeah. It's also the case that it suits people who don't want Angela Rayner to be the leader, to whisper to things, to people, to people like me saying, oh, well, she was loving it in the tea room. She was holding court. She loves kicking gear and all of that. But you already have that. I mean, it's not TBGBs, but it's the. Well, Wesi, Angie's, whatever, whatever we're going to call it if we get to that point. You've got a taste of a little taste of what a potential contest might be like. And it's not pretty. But I should say, however, for the record, for newscasters, Pat McFadden was booked ages ago in the, in the government grid to come on and talk about apprenticeships. So scurrilous suggestions that he was only put up because of this mess are actually, are. Are not well placed. However, as you say, also is completely seen as a safe pair of hands and he probably would have been the government's choice anyway to come and have to deal with these sorts of allegations. He also told us this morning he thinks Peter Manderson should give his payoff from the Foreign Office when he was sacked as ambassador to a charity. And he called on Peter Manderson to do that.
- [15:35]
A
Yes, because that's the lead report on this front page of the Sunday Times and the top of the BBC News today. But now you're saying Pat McFan's going for it, saying, give it to a charity.
- [15:44]
C
Yes, and he said that on. On tv and, you know, he said that to someone who was his friend for many, many, many, many years. And he said that with the authority of a very senior cabinet minister, sitting and telling the country, you should give the money back. We don't know what will happen next. But, yeah, that's now out there on the Record.
- [16:00]
G
But even though there is so much gloom around about Keir Starmer's future, from one conversation I've had with someone in number 10 today, they actually think that the Sunday papers, even though there is this story about the payout maybe around 40 grand from the Foreign Office to Mandelston and the story of infighting, they think it could have been far worse. There were no new, enormous, shocking revelations. And Pat McFadden looked, yeah, he looked deflated, but he got through Laura's program without, you know, any sort of big errors or mistakes.
- [16:35]
C
I think also what there was not in the newspapers was a cabinet minister coming out Saying, I'm off up with this. I cannot put. There was also no reporting that said 10 cabinet ministers in cabal getting ready to go and tell Starmer to go now. Everything feels, frankly, still incredibly febrile. But you're. You're right that Downing street woke up to headlines that could have been a lot worse. They have, though, now a difficult headline from, as you said, the first leader of an affiliated union, so one that's officially connected to the Labour Party, the Fire Brigades union, their boss, its boss. Steve Wright, was the first union leader to say on the record that there should be a contest and Starmer should go now. Now, he's previously said, oh, after May, we'll have to see. But Steve Wright said there should be a contest now. And that does move the story on because union leaders talk to each other a lot, too. You know, it's significant he's saying that. But the sort of union family is a very, very important part of the labor movement and because they are an officially connected union to the Labour Party, it's quite a moment. And it implies. It doesn't say explicitly, but it implies that there might be other union leaders who are moving to that way, too.
- [17:51]
H
I think we need to see change. I think 18 months ago, the general public wanted to see that change. We're not seeing it, we're just seeing a continuation of what happened before, and I think that needs to be a leadership change and I think MPs need to be calling for that. And Triggerer.
- [18:06]
C
So you think your Starmer should go?
- [18:09]
H
Well, I think everybody's thinking it and people are just not saying it at the moment. Unfortunately, we're seeing MPs being wheeled out again today to sweep up the mess behind the Prime Minister at the moment. And it seems that the Prime Minister isn't taking advice from elected people within his own government. We've seen that he didn't listen to the former deputy Prime Minister. He hasn't listened to his current deputy prime minister. He's listening to a factional group which are making bad decisions, it seems. And I want to see the change that was promised and that this country needs.
- [18:37]
A
So that's a very interesting first.
- [18:38]
C
That's.
- [18:39]
A
We think that's the first public such statement from a trade union leader. So just two other things. Readouts, if I may, from David Blunket. I asked what. Well, I asked what should happen in Downing street this week, and he said to me that it's a matter for Keir Starmer and Victoria to decide. And I thought that's A very interesting answer. I think I probably should have asked him more about that, but that was an interesting thing. He said.
- [19:05]
C
So. His wife.
- [19:06]
A
Yeah, his wife. Excuse me. And that would be the. Because she's said to have been instrumental in making him stay when he lost out in the leadership race previously.
- [19:14]
D
Whatever.
- [19:15]
A
You know, all those rows of the past. Yeah, Hartlepool. But anyway, here's what David Blanken had to say about all the jostling for position.
- [19:23]
E
Yeah, well, it's pretty unseemly, isn't it? And I thought it was awful unseemliness under the last lot. And I say to colleagues, look, I appreciate after all these years in the Labour Party, over 60 years, that things are dire, but they're made more difficult by briefings and counter briefings. When people see a party acting like ferrets in a sack, they draw the conclusion. So let's try and, once again, let's try and get our act together. Let's speak with a common voice about what we're about. I call it competence, coherence and connectivity. And connectivity is about engaging with the people we represent, the people that put me in Parliament in the north of Sheffield, who I love and care about.
- [20:17]
C
And it's such a good reminder that, you know, the most important constituency in all of this is, of course, the public. It's not the, you know, the soft left faction or the Progress faction or the Fabian faction or any other labor faction. The public were told by Keir Starmer 4 years that if they voted for him, not just that the country would improve, but that the politics would be different. It wouldn't be people shouting at each other, it wouldn't be different bits of his party going at it. It wouldn't be sleazy, it wouldn't be fighty. It would be calm and sensible and competent and all the rest. And you can hear the frustration in David Blunk. He's almost like a sort of head teacher there, isn't he? Saying, for goodness sake, how many times do I have to tell you?
- [20:55]
A
You've let the school down, you've let the spouse down, you've let yourself down.
- [20:59]
H
Right?
- [20:59]
A
There's a comment in Jason Cowley's article in the Sunday Times that says about K. Starmer's decision to appoint Peter Mandelson, was there a clue in his moniker, the Prince of Darkness? Was there a clue there? Here?
- [21:14]
C
Well, this is the whole thing, right at root. This is because this becomes about the Prime Minister's judgment and that's why they're in such a horrendous mess. As we said yesterday, you know, Keir Starmer is not responsible for Peter Mandelson's behavior. He is responsible for the decision that he made. And there are viewers, some viewers getting in touch with us, sort of just don't buy the argument that just because Peter Mandelson was a bit misleading, that somehow Keir Starmer shouldn't have, shouldn't have known or shouldn't have been able to predict. Now, there is, of course, a conversation, and Pat McFadden tried to raise it this morning, about whether or not society more broadly, who didn't make much of a murmur about Peter Manelson getting the job, including journalism, you know, basically, oh, it wasn't just Keir Starmer that concluded this, but Keir Starmer's the one who's the Prime Minister. That's the point. This is about the Prime Minister's judgment and that's why this is so damaging, because the opposition parties can say, look, all the clues are there. There were loads of red flags and you just didn't look hard enough.
- [22:12]
G
And Morgan McSweeney didn't make the decision ultimately, did it? Yeah, he may have recommended somebody, seemingly Peter Mandelson, but Keir Starmer was the one who had the paper and presumably signed a bit of paper or told one of his senior officials, this is what I want to happen. It's quite hard to blame other people. And this is before we get to what is presumably going to be an absolute nightmare for the government, which is all of these documents coming out.
- [22:34]
A
I mean, you imagine what this would have been like if this had been a calumny presented by a Conservative administration. What on earth would Labour have said about the Conservatives? I think that's why the Prime Minister appears to be so eaten up by what. What's happened.
- [22:48]
C
Yeah, I mean, they'd have screamed sleaze, they'd have gone absolutely bananas and they'd have tried to do as much political damage with it as they possibly could have done. And there is a. Not parallel, but there's something of a similarity with a story that we reported on some years ago now, when James Dyson, the very wealthy, incredibly successful businessman, created lots of jobs and all the rest and made sold lots of vacuums. He texted Boris Johnson about tax arrangements during the pandemic. Boris Johnson replied to him in a way that, when opposition parties saw those texts, suggested that Boris Johnson was trying to do James Dyson a favor. Now, without re litigating that whole story, and of course, both Boris Johnson and James Dyson sort of denied that they'd done anything wrong. That was a huge story. And labor, the opposition at the time went absolutely tonto about it. So I think it's a point worth raising. And maybe you're right. That is why this is so, so painful for Keir starmer, because as Mr. Rules both as his sort of caricature but also his real nature, this has really got to hurt so much of.
- [23:54]
G
His brand, so much of the period in opposition where he got to number 10 through in a lot of cases, Boris Johnson's troubles around honesty. I mean, it must be so painful that that brand, that central sort of understanding himself of what, what he thought he was, has been irreparably tarnished.
- [24:17]
A
Because what it is, we can replace Partygate with Mandy Gate and we've effectively got the same level of scandal for Keir Starmer as, but as it's obviously as big as what Boris Johnson.
- [24:27]
G
I mean. So I suppose the difference, I would say, and it's probably worth highlighting it, is that it doesn't seem that Keir Starmer has lied or done anything illegal, but he made one absolutely calamitous decision. And certainly, Paddy, in terms of the bad news headlines over many weeks and how you associate the Prime Minister in all these stories, albeit indirectly, with one of the most notorious paedophiles in recent history is arguably more damaging than Partygate, even though, of course, Partygate eventually ended up.
- [25:07]
A
Yes, a good distinction. It could be journalese by me, but I suppose I am speaking journalese. It's, that's, that's kind of, that is the level of it and it's going to get bigger because we're going to see individual named ministers typing, you know, I'm typing to you. Imagine if my messages to you were released.
- [25:25]
C
Good lord.
- [25:25]
G
Good.
- [25:26]
A
Going back, going back, mainly you're sending.
- [25:28]
C
Me pictures of the crankies and me sending you pictures of Billy Bunter. So I think that would be, well.
- [25:32]
G
Not just the you two, but everybody in your social and professional network network in email, in whatsapps over what, a year. And the, it's not necessarily there's going to be something, there's going to be some sort of smoking gun. But we're going to talk about absolute cringe, aren't we?
- [25:48]
C
Well, yes, I think cringe in messaging. But if it's cringe and a few people who, who you know are, are close to this have, have said with some confidence actually that they think it will be embarrassing, but kind of fine. But I don't know. And I think in terms of the comparisons, I think they're both the two things what Rosanna Alain Khan called Scandalson this morning. She said we've had enough of Scandalson. And I don't know if she did that by mistake, but it was a good line. They are both comparable and not comparable. They're comparable in the sort of scale of political trouble they've left a Prime Minister in. They're not comparable in that what we have here is a Prime Minister making one a what looks now dreadful decision that has looked like a dreadful decision because of hindsight. Whereas Partygate I think was different because it was about a culture and an administration that had developed over a period of time and it was so sickening to the public because they found out there'd been various goings on when the whole country was suffering. But I think in the shocking level of trouble this leaves the Prime Minister in, it's incredibly serious in they think they are comparable but their handling has been so different because remember for months basically Boris Johnson was saying, well we didn't do anything wrong, go away, nothing to see here.
- [27:12]
A
But he was being pursued by Keir Starmer in common saying, think very carefully how you answer this question, think very carefully how you answer. And of course that all came back. The boot was on the other foot when three times it took the Leader of the Opposition did. Was it known that the links with between Epstein and Manson continued three times.
- [27:31]
C
And one of the side plots in all of this that newscasters may have noted is that Kemi Bednock is playing a effective, smart hand with the cards that she has got now, of course, and I'd say this again, and we've said this, I think every time we've discussed this, the people who are most important in all of this I are the victims of terrible crimes, women in America who went through horror at the hands of Epstein and his circle. But in terms of the politics in this country and the fallout, Kemi Bo has been looking sharper, more effective to her party, hasn't made much difference in the polls, but she is playing the cards well at the moment in terms of what she's got to work with because opposition politics is about opportunity, creating them and using them when they come along.
- [28:24]
G
The Prime Minister also probably realizes he has given his opponent on the other side of the Commons the perfect scandal that has allowed her to have her most effective and high profile successes in the last six months. One with the PMQs while Mandelson was still ambassador. And this week with the PMQS and then Opposition Day debate that resulted in these, this, these documents may be a hundred thousand of them coming out in the next few weeks.
- [28:56]
A
Every time I listen to you, I steal what you say and then say it later as if I thought of it. But the whole man, the whole Mandelson Day, Barclay, has been the making of Kemi Banok in the Commons, because that's when she got her mojo together the first time, when she learned how to ask questions. Because we've said before, she was so dreadful, people thought she was working for the Labour Party at one point when she, when she used.
- [29:16]
C
Well, people in her own party. People in her own party were fairly doom laden in the first few months of her leadership. So that's not just you being rude.
- [29:24]
A
I would not be rude. But the thing is, it's the fact, it's an interesting thing about parliamentary arithmetic. Although reform are doing very well in the opinion polls, they don't have the same role in Parliament. They don't have the MPs. She's got the Leader of the Opposition.
- [29:38]
C
Payroll and she gets six questions. Every question on the telly which they.
- [29:44]
G
Have used, they use that that afternoon just absolutely perfectly, including the first, have two canceling the second one. So the first one dragged on and allowed more Labour mps to voice their fury and frustration. It was a real parliamentary success for her and her whipping operation.
- [30:02]
C
So, Joe, what happens next, you think? It's obviously this PMQ is on Wednesday, but is there anything big happening in Westminster tomorrow?
- [30:07]
G
Do we know from talking to people in number 10, they do not seem to know what is going to be happening in the next few weeks and haven't worked out a key strategy. I suppose the Prime Minister's diary is likely not to be too busy because they need to be reactive. Certainly in recent months, Keir Starmer has got far better at interacting with MPs, being in the Commons more, being in the Tea Rooms, more inviting people to checkers and number 10. I think this coming week may be another week to do more of that. And he may want to repeat what he told MPs at Chequers on Thursday night. Some. Some northern MPs were invited for dinner there, which is that his argument? We've all come into this for reasons of sort of public service and duty and we need to respond to the Mandelson scandal by ensuring this can't happen again and improving systems in government to ensure that people who get senior jobs are rigorously checked and tested so we don't have bad headlines like this. I think he's going to want to try and harness this for his own benefit. But also, as soon as MPs are back together on Monday afternoon from their constituencies, the plotting could begin again.
- [31:23]
C
So as nine minutes past 11 on Sunday, we are not expecting there to be big, dramatic changes in politics in the next few days, which almost inevitably means that there will, there will be.
- [31:33]
A
In final words from us, partic thistle 132 away at Elgin City.
- [31:37]
C
This is great news. And it almost makes up for Scotland losing the rugby, but not quite. Yes, only by three points.
- [31:42]
A
I mean, come on, it's a Super bowl tonight.
- [31:45]
C
Yes. Bad Bun. Airplane.
- [31:46]
A
Bunny Bunkins is playing.
- [31:48]
C
Yeah, Billy Bunter.
- [31:49]
A
It's Billy Bun. Bunny Bunkin.
- [31:52]
B
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 Merriman 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.
- [32:30]
A
And we've got Enid Blyton has taken over the Super Bowl.
- [32:34]
C
Is there any Blighton podcast?
- [32:35]
A
I hope so.
- [32:37]
C
You should do the nomination on it. You're like Jack and Jill.
- [32:41]
A
Joe, we're saying goodbye to you.
- [32:42]
G
Goodbye from the Famous Three.
- [32:44]
A
Well, it's Famous Three. Yeah. And everything you say, I steal. Just remember that. Goodbye.
- [32:49]
C
Goodbye.
- [32:50]
F
Goodbye.
- [32:51]
G
Newscast.
- [32:52]
C
Newscast from the BBC.
- [32:54]
F
Thank you so much for making it to the end of Newscast. You clearly copyright Chris Mason.
- [32:59]
G
Ooze Stamina.
- [33:00]
F
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 033-01-239480 and I promise you we read and listen to every single message. Thanks for listening to this podcast by.
- [33:41]
B
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 Merriman and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss? The the first time the History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.