← The Rest Is Politics
Loading summary
Transcript93 lines
- [00:01]
Alistair Campbell
Thanks for listening to the Rest is Politics. Sign up to the Rest is Politics plus to enjoy ad free listening, receive a weekly newsletter, join our members chat room and gain early access to live show tickets. Just go to therestispolitics.com that's therestispolitics.com this episode is powered by Fuse Energy.
- [00:15]
Rory Stewart
Fuse are currently one of the fastest growing energy suppliers in the uk and this September they're raising the stakes.
- [00:21]
Alistair Campbell
Anyone who's on the fixed tariff on the 5th of October will be eligible for a chance to win £20,000 in cash.
- [00:27]
Rory Stewart
The average household could save around £200 by switching to fuse today only takes three minutes. Three minutes to cut your bills, fix your rate and maybe end the month with £20,000 in cash.
- [00:38]
Alistair Campbell
That's less time than it takes for a referee to give a dodgy penalty for Liverpool against Burnley and with a far better outcome.
- [00:44]
Rory Stewart
So add it to the back to school list. Do it before the heating goes on, before the Christmas bills arrive. And unlike most deadlines in politics, this one won't move.
- [00:52]
Alistair Campbell
Go to fuseenergy.com politics to switch to a fuse fixed tariff by October 5th and be in with a chance to win £20,000.
- [01:00]
Rory Stewart
TNC supply please find on the landing page.
- [01:12]
Alistair Campbell
Welcome to a live episode of the Rest is Politics. We're going to talk about two things and this is going as well as going out live. This will be our main podcast this week. We're going to talk about Keir Starmer's speech and the Labour Party conference. And we're also going to talk about Donald Trump's Gaza plan that he announced unveiled yesterday with Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House. But let's start with Labour. Keir Starmer has made his speech. It was rapturously received in the hall in Liverpool. Quite hard not to be rapturous received at a party conference these days. But I think it was my sense it was pretty genuine, I thought. And interestingly, the first comment I heard was from the normally fairly waspish Sam Coates at Sky, who, who said he felt that Keir Starmer had, somewhat, to his surprise, wowed them. Did you get a chance to watch it live? Rory?
- [02:06]
Rory Stewart
No, I read the speech, so I've seen the whole text and I caught a little bit of him speaking. Just one thing though, to begin with is that some journalists were sort of predicting that this would happen, that the narrative would be scandal, all this stuff going wrong, resignations, Andy Burnham coming up, and then the speech would turn it around and everyone would be very excited by speech and then a month later everything would collapse again. And that's what everyone was saying a week ago. And it seems to be what's happened. Can you just. I don't want to sound too postmodern, but any sense of why that often is the way of things?
- [02:40]
Alistair Campbell
No, because the way the hype works is that you go through a build up to a big event and the buildup tends to focus on all the things that could go either right or wrong. And then. So. So I think what happened this time is that part of the build up was about Andy Burnham. There's a lot of talk about Andy Burnham thinking about making a challenge, thinking about getting a seat, getting back into Parliament and then kind of day one that sort of faded away. I think that what's happened in the last. I was up there last night and I think what's happened is that there's. I think they've shown a bit of fight and a bit of passion and I think that's what the party's been wanting to see for some time. And I thought what was interesting, you can always often tell, obviously you've got to be careful not to think that the, the hall reacting is the public. But it's always interesting to see which bits really do sort of fire up the audience. And there was one bit, I. I think Keir Starmer was probably quite startled by it, you know, sometimes, but it's usually a sort of Barack Obama style oratory does it where you get rolling applause where people start to clap and then you carry on speaking. And he had a couple of sections like that were ess, essentially were about either things that the Labour government has done or I think where he got really started to connect with the audience was when he was really going for a farage, really going for reform, really sort of hitting the values piece. So I think you'll be pretty happy that the talk at the start has kind of faded. And then as you say, we'll have to see where this feels in a month, two months, three months time. And of course the big event coming up now in November is the budget and that's when we're going to see. I noticed one line, he said, tough choices will keep on coming. I think that was as close as we got to an indication of the budget.
- [04:31]
Rory Stewart
VAT rises. Well, the narrative of the speech was, I think, really interesting and I think, as usual, I think. And this will be true for Carney or Albanese or anybody from the progressive center taking on the populace. They've got to do something Quite tough, which is they've got to acknowledge that a lot of the public share the grumbles of the populace, share the sense that things are broken, things aren't working. They think their children's lives are going to be worse off than they are. Cost of living isn't going right, so immigration's too high, you've got to acknowledge that. But you've then got to do something quite difficult, which is then work out how you make yourself different from the populace. You do that either by saying, I guess the reasons for this problem are different from what Farage says, or I have a different solution. And it's at that bit that I guess he skates through in the speech quite elegantly. And it's a difficult balance because he's saying, basically one moment he's saying everything's really crap and the Tories screwed it all up and everything's rubbish. But on the other hand, he's saying Farage is too negative and Britain's great and terrific and it's all going to be terrific, and I believe it. But the thing that I think will still be the big problem is what's the big idea of the solution? And there still, there seem to be two stories going on. One of them is the Rachel Reeve story, which is, we need to be sensible, careful with our money, don't tax too much, don't spend too much, don't borrow too much, control public spending, relatively kind of traditional free market view on how you get the economy growing. And then there was another story that Starmer was pushing, which was more popular with the audience. Guess which was the more sort of, let's be more Swedish social democratic, so let's spend more on skills, on investment, on industrial policy, let's get growth from the bottom up. Let's have a really different type of economic model. And the problem with that, of course, is they can't, like Biden, borrow. And they don't have, as Germany or the Netherlands do, quite a lot of fiscal headroom with their deficit, so they're tight of cash. So it's very difficult to work out how you can be a kind of bidenomic social democrat when you don't have any extra money unless you're prepared to cut welfare, which he can't, on which.
- [06:53]
Alistair Campbell
There was, if I'm right, no mention at all. I think that he was pains to point out that growth remains the number one mission. And talking about that, where I think you're right in terms of the sort of leaning into a more kind of social democrat approach, I was the one big surprise in the speech, I think, was this moving away from the goal of getting 50% of young people into university and changing that to 2/3 of people going to university or having a gold standard apprenticeship. That went down unbelievably well. And I think that was about trying to fit into this message. The message he kept repeating was a Britain built for all. And that was essentially saying about the idea of proper respect for working people, proper respect for apprenticeships. He rather amusingly, although I'd. I don't know whether he was surprised that he got as many laughs as he did. He revisited the occupation of his father.
- [07:51]
Rory Stewart
Yeah, good moment, wasn't it?
- [07:53]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah, the tool maker. But he did so in this context of respect and dignity. He kept talking about respect and dignity. And I think that what was interesting, I think the Labour Party, I think, feels a little bit liberated. He only mentioned the Tories once and it was as a joke. The Tories, remember them in terms of the sort of the politics of this, I think they feel a bit liberated to think, right, we've stopped sort of thinking, can we ignore Farage? Do we have to just sort of hope he goes away like a bad smell? They. They've now absolutely set out, he is the enemy, he is the person they've got to take down. And I think it's that that's put a bit of fire in their belly. And I thought he was, I thought, you know, the fact that literally the whole of the cabinet sitting there waving union flags and Flags of St. George and Saltires and Red Dragons and, and what have you. So they. Reclaiming the flag was a big part of this, but I think it was about saying, ultimately we have values that they don't agree with. And he addressed those within this context of the concept of patriotic renewal. What does patriotism really mean in the modern age?
- [08:58]
Rory Stewart
And he's very, very aware, isn't he, of the success of Albanese and Mark Carney. Against the odds, progressive center left parties that were behind in the polls went into the elections against Trumpian populists, or people who were definitely portrayed as Trumpian populists, and then beat all the odds to win, largely because Trump had discredited that whole thing. So it feels like it's a great gift to center left progressive parties to be able to say this other lot is like Trump. I mean, it raises one question though, which is the more he lays into his values problem with Farage, the more people are going to say, well, okay, so what do you think about Trump, who's much worse on almost all these indicators and where Starmer doesn't actually ever speak out against him.
- [09:47]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah. And for reasons which I think we all understand is because he's sort of so reliant on foreign and defense policy and trade on a very volatile, unpredictable Trump. I guess of the two, he's probably more minded to think about Albanesi as the comeback guy, because Carney's comeback was predicated upon the incumbent incumbent being booted out at the last minute. But I think it was the one thing I'd like to have seen more of that was. And I know I've been involved in many, many, many conference speeches. You can't address every policy. It's best to have one big argument driving through. And I think his argument was patriotic renewal of Britain built for all, et cetera. But I'd like to have seen the politics of this with Farage, maybe in a bigger context, the context that we were talking about on the podcast last week with Gerald Knauz. Why this? So there was brief mention of Ukraine. There was a very brief mention within the context of defense industry, of Putin's aggression. But I actually think that the other place where he could have found a real voice and real leadership is in the sense of this is happening all over Europe and we are part of this battle all over Europe. You know, it's the AfD, it's Le Pen and Bardella, it's Wilders in Holland, and it's Farage here. And set it in that context, I think that would have given it a kind of bigger picture. But look, I think he and his team will be pretty happy with how.
- [11:11]
Rory Stewart
It'S gone just on that one. Two things there. One is I completely agree because it would resonate very well with who he is. He's got a pass as a human rights lawyer. And in fact, his attorney general's been quite strong on this come out. Done some quite strong stuff in ECHR recently, sort of echoing what you were saying last week. But it's also true that I think it would appeal to labor because it gives the moral purpose. I mean, this famous cliche about you being a moral crusade at, well, you're nothing. This is a really great crusade because this is a crusade about peace above all. I mean, I think that's probably the most powerful thing, which is if you can make the link not just between human rights and morality, but human rights and peace. I mean, explain how what these guys are doing is leading to a world of more conflict and more danger for our Children and grandchildren. But it's also something I think that would unite people on the left of the MPs on the left of the party, the kind of people I talk to quite a lot who are a bit uncertain about where he's going on Gaza, a bit uncertain about where he's going on two child benefit. To hear him really make the big progressive international argument, and I'm surprised he ducked that.
- [12:21]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah, I guess it is just in the end, you start feeling you've got to cover too much, pack too much into the argument. But I think as this goes on, what I sort of sense of this is, hopefully from the Labour Party's perspective, they've sort of got over the wobble of the last few weeks. The mood last night when I was there and this morning felt a lot better than I'd been hearing and reading on the media. But I think the other thing that that does is it gives him this sense of the international leader as well, which I know is not. We often say, well, that's kind of no votes tv. But I actually think that his leadership related to his values within some of these bigger battles. He can't take on Trump in the way that Mark Carney and Albanese did because it's just going to. It will. It will upset too many apple carts. What he can do, though, is say that, you know, we in Europe, the progressives in Europe, are in the fight of our life and it's a fight for what sort of future we believe in based on values, based on, you know, strong sense of patriotism. And I thought. I thought his stuff on immigration was interesting. I thought he did it. I thought he did that quite well, actually. He. He told this story about sitting down with a woman who was showing off pictures of her being with her best friend, who was Asian, and then they were. But they actually, she didn't. It was the Eastern Europeans who'd come in and change the. Change the, the sort of nature of the street that they lived in. And, and I think he was essentially, because the. The audience in the hall loved it when he took on Farage over racism. Absolutely went for that in a big way. But he was just as determined to make sure they heard the message that it is not racist to say that you've got to control immigration. It is reasonable to say we have to control and we have to know who's coming in the country to move.
- [14:09]
Rory Stewart
Away from the speech onto the kind of policy problem. I still think the big issue for labor is are they going to be able to prove to people that they're serious about economic growth, or at least the kind of economic growth that Rachel Reeves and the treasury believe in. And I think Rachel Reeves, broadly speaking, and contradict me if I'm wrong, is actually relatively mainstream on this. I think she thinks that the way to get growth is to stop taxes getting too high, keep investment going, try to keep it good for business and ideally try to cut some of the welfare budget so you can free up. So the money that you're putting into infrastructure or AI or whatever, it's not extra money, but it's capital investment coming out. But can they do that when he's carrying with him a Labour Party that basically wants to spend on welfare, wants to spend on wages and finds it very, very difficult to accept cuts there and begins to think, what's the point of labor if we're doing that? Because it sounds too much like austerity.
- [15:15]
Alistair Campbell
When you arrive in Liverpool at the moment you get off the train and the first thing you see is this gigantic, gigantic poster across from Liverpool Lime street and it's from Save the Children. Was it the point of winning to lift kids out of poverty, Scrap the two child limit? Now there wasn't and there was a lot of talk that that was going to be trail and mentioned in the speech. It wasn't. So look, I think you're right about the sort of central tension and of course that vote on welfare reform having been lost. They are going to have to revisit it at some point. They're obviously going to have to revisit in a different way. But I think one of the reasons why Pat McFadden has been moved into work and pensions is to go and, you know, once there's this Stephen Timms review that is the product of the welfare rebellion that he's doing with the disability groups. But they are going to have to revisit welfare, there's no doubt about that. And so I think that's what he was alluding to when he talked about tough choices are still going to keep coming. What I think they're trying to do though, is give themselves a sense of the long term. I mean, they, you still hear they don't really have a sense of what the big growth plan is, okay? They think that there are too many levers that they've either cut off or they haven't adopted. Now it's never too late to do these things, but they have got. The economy's got to start growing by the second half of this Parliament. Otherwise some of these other things that he was talking about today are not going to be possible again. The audience loved it when he talked about lifting children out of poverty and every child getting a good start in life and all that stuff. But as I heard those, I was thinking, right, well, he's saying the right things, but they're all dependent then upon the plan that follows. One other thing I was surprised about on the policy front, Rory, is that just a few days ago, they made a big thing of launching this digital ID plan. There's no mention of it. Sometimes you've got to. The only way to win an argument, particularly in the modern age, is you've got to keep remaking it. So I was surprised by that. I thought that was another issue.
- [17:24]
Rory Stewart
It's a bit strange once you've taken the risk of doing that, and it's a risk, you should make it your thing, make a virtue of it and say, this is part of our immigration plan. And, yep, that sounds quite right wing, but this is what we're doing and people remember it when they, I mean, take on. Because you'll get, presumably quite a lot of the left attacking you about it. You'll have bits of the right attacking you about it. So it can be quite a good wedge issue for voters to think, okay, we know what they're doing.
- [17:50]
Alistair Campbell
What did you think? I was doing an event last night with Nick Thomas Simmons, who's a very thoughtful member of the government, and it was very interesting. One of the questioners that was this event where we were just in conversation together and she said that she didn't yet have a sense of what the Labour Party had decided the attack on Nigel Farage was. And I just wonder what you thought today of the way that Keir Starmer went for Farage and whether you thought it was effective.
- [18:21]
Rory Stewart
I think it's good. I think it's good. I think it's quite complicated, is the problem, I mean, really appealing to me, which is to say Farage actually isn't proud of Britain. He doesn't believe in Britain. But it's quite a complicated thought because of course, most reform voters will be like, well, hold a second. Of course he believes in Britain. Of course he's proud of Britain. That's why I support reform. So it's a little. The jiu jitsu may be a little bit too clever. I mean, I sort of prefer your line, which is, this is a fight for values. This is a fight for the Britain we care about. This is fight for Europe. This is a fight for peace. This is a fight for dignity. And equality and this guy's a rogue.
- [19:02]
Alistair Campbell
Both he and we're treating earlier really went for Farage on the sort of, you know, snake oil salesman type of thing. The other thing, he did mention the B word three times. Very good. So that's slow progress, progress.
- [19:17]
Rory Stewart
I mean, this is too self centered. But I think, if I think about my own attempts to do this kind of thing, when I was trying to get involved in the referendum campaign in Scotland, I tried to make an argument which was really appealing to some people, which is that the Scottish Nationalists are about division. They're about believing that if you just get rid of London, all your problems will be solved. They're about putting up borders and actually we should be thinking about expanding into Europe and a bigger global world and not getting smaller. But my conclusion in the end is it was too complicated. That most curious SMP voters, that wasn't how they saw that party. And that's what slightly worries me here, that if you're a reform voter, are you really going to believe that the basic problem with Farage is that he's not proud of Britain? No, not really.
- [20:03]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah. The only thing, the other thing that I thought they might have gone on this, we haven't spoken yet about this guy Nathan Gill, the leader of reform in Wales, who's now admitted these charges of bribery by the Russians. I mean, it's like, and, and, and you've had, you've, you've had Richard Tai saying that, you know, you never met him. And of course all these pictures come out of them together and endless pictures. But I sort of think that there is something on the patriotic front about Russia. And of course this then also I think takes you back to Brexit as well. So I think there is, I think you could make the case. I thought it was a very powerful line when he said, have you ever. When was the last time you heard Nigel Farage say positive about Britain? And I like the section at the end of the speech where he was hitting back at Broken Britain, telling these stories of individuals who'd done things, you know, the girl who built, started a football team, the boy who cleared off races, graffiti, whatever. And so I think you could build that case. But the point this question was making at my event with Nick Thomas Simmons last night is that they're kind of trying a few scattergun approaches. It's the NHS is. He doesn't understand the economy. He's a one man band. It's Russia, whatever. I think they need to sit down now that they've decided Farage is the main opposition. They really need to sit down and have a proper strategic audit on how they're going to actually attack him over time. Another person there last night who was from the life Sciences made another interesting observation. So, you know, we all know what Farage thinks about immigration because we hear him talk about it all the time. When are they going to be put under proper pressure to start to explain what they think about things like live sciences, things like the. The future of the health, health system, whatever. So I think that's a job both for the opposite, both for labor and the Tories and the Lib Dems, etc, but also for the media as well. If this guy is now being talked about as the next prime minister, he has to be put under proper scrutiny and that can't just be left to the parties. The media's got to be part of that as well.
- [22:03]
Rory Stewart
Final one for me, I think this shift to go after reform just underscores what existential trouble the Tories are in. I mean, listeners will probably have picked up, not maybe all international listeners, that there are now opinion polls out suggesting that reform is going to get well over 300 seats, could even get a full majority in Parliament, and that the Tories will drop down to sort of 30 or 40 seats, and labor could be down below 100. So I think he's right that his route, Keir Starmer's route back, is by focusing on reform. But presumably that will make the job for Conservatives even more difficult. If the BBC believes that the two main parties are reform and the government, if Kiyosama believes the two main parties are reform and the government, how on earth are the Conservatives supposed to find space? Because their economic policy is not very different from Rachel Reeves. They're carrying all the blame for the last 14, 15 years and all the energy on the right is seeping towards reform. I mean, can you see this? A bit ridiculous, two and a half years out of election, but can you see a route back for the Conservatives?
- [23:15]
Alistair Campbell
Look, I think Kemi Badenok's in a lot of trouble and of course she's got Robert Jenrick, who's basically kind of trying to be a kind of mini. Farage, clearly thinks the Conservatives have to absolutely fight the Tories on that, on that territory. I think they. I thought one of the points Ed Davey made in his speech about the Conservatives, it seems to me they have had no real analysis as to why they lost. Bit like the Democrats in America. But even worse, they still talk and act as though everything they did was Fine. All the problems that labor are now doing, difficult things to try and sort out, are bad for Labour. But they never kind of own their own responsibility. I think till they do that, nobody's going to listen to the them. Just on this MRP poll, I think we've got to be very, very, very careful. I mean, these polls always start with if there was an election tomorrow, how would you vote? We're several years away and as David Lammy rightly pointed out, Norway, Australia, Canada, lots can happen. And the other thing, the one interesting thing I did think in the, I read the poll and I read the notes. When you look at the seats that Reform are taking from labor, according to this MRP poll, 82 of them, they are winning with less than 5%. So those are all eminently losable. When you look at Lib Dem seats that Lib Dems might be taking off the Tories, they have an average lead almost four times that, an average lead of 18 points. So what you're looking at with a lot of these seats that this MRP poll is suggesting that might lead to Farage getting some sort of majority or certainly minority government, a lot of them are still very, very winnable back for labor, for Tories, whoever it might be that they're taking them from.
- [25:02]
Rory Stewart
Okay, I mean, I think let's maybe take a break and then come back and do Gaza. But any, any last points that looking at this that you thought about conference that we should before we move on to Gaza.
- [25:12]
Alistair Campbell
I think the leadership things settled for a while. I, I thought that the as. So I think the conference itself as a whole has gone pretty well for Labor. It's kind of, it's been solid. I think I, I'm sure the right wing papers will find something to sort of, you know, say it was a terrible speech. But watching it and then seeing some of the reaction, not just from the audience but also from outsiders, I think it was a very, very good speech by certainly by Keir Starmer standards, which, you know, he's not, he's not a great orator, but I think there was an argument there about renewal. There was a fight there and there was a sense of him. And so I think he will have felt he's ticked the boxes. But ultimately if the, you know, he said growth is the big mission, if the economy doesn't pick up. He had a lot to point to. There were a lot of things they pointed to. I wish to hell that they didn't. They spent more time actually communicating some of this stuff. I even felt The Labour Party audience were cheering things about some of the big investments that have happened. There was one that in the mention in Hartlepool in Wales, and they loved the thing about the Glasgow and the Clyde getting the big shipbuilding thing. But I felt even the Labour Party wasn't aware of some of these things that had happened. You know, what if the Labour Party members who go to conferences aren't aware? What chance does the bloody public have? But anyway, I thought it, I thought it was interesting. I think that the, the Tories will be worried. I mean, I don't know what the Tory strategy will be for their conference next week. We've had Farage, who got a sort of, you know, two days mega publicity. We've had Ed Davy, who I thought did pretty well, Labour's done pretty well. And then we're into the Tories, who, as you say, I think are facing something of an existential threat. So it all basically says that politics is very, very interesting, which is why we keep doing podcasts, talk about it. We're going to have a quick break and then we're going to come back and talk about Donald Trump bringing eternal peace to the Middle East. This episode is brought to you by NordVPN.
- [27:16]
Rory Stewart
September, new term. Darker evenings. Calendars filling fast. Everyone's getting organized, including the people watching your online activity.
- [27:25]
Alistair Campbell
NordVPN stops that one tap and your connection is encrypted. Public Wi Fi at the station, coffee shop or library safe. No prying eyes, no one harvesting your data. Just you browsing away in peace.
- [27:38]
Rory Stewart
Threat Protection Pro also blocks malicious links, scans, downloads, keeping your devices clean. Think of it as the bouncer for your browser. The shady stuff doesn't get past the.
- [27:50]
Alistair Campbell
Door and it keeps prices honest. Online deals shift depending on where you appear to be. With NordVPN, you see the real numbers, not the inflated ones.
- [27:58]
Rory Stewart
One account covers up to 10 devices, phones, laptops, even the telly. Or install it on your router so the whole household's protected without effort.
- [28:06]
Alistair Campbell
To get the best discount off your NORDVPN plan, go to nordvpn.com restispolitics Our.
- [28:12]
Rory Stewart
Link also gives you four extra months on the two year plan. There's no risk with Nord's 30 day money back guarantee. The link is in the episode description box. This episode is brought to you by Google. We won't fully realize the potential gains of AI unless we make it accessible and useful for everybody across the whole UK workforce. That's why Google, for example, are working closely with trade unions, AI and Trade.
- [28:38]
Alistair Campbell
Unions may not sound like the most natural of partners, but the union movement has got a proud history of supporting members from across the economy and preparing them for the ever changing world of work.
- [28:49]
Rory Stewart
That's why Google partnered, for example, with the community union in the UK on a People's first skills pilot called AI Works. And it's designed to see how AI could help workers and ultimately create productivity benefits across the whole wider economy.
- [29:04]
Alistair Campbell
Just a few hours of training could save members almost a month, a year on routine tasks, time free for the work where their expertise really counts.
- [29:11]
Rory Stewart
One community member, for example, working in a supported living home, said Gemini helped streamline paperwork so she could spend more time with residents.
- [29:20]
Alistair Campbell
That's a very powerful story and it shows the positive impact AI can have on people's lives, making a real difference in the day to day.
- [29:27]
Rory Stewart
Find out how Google's AI is helping fuel the UK's growth and transformation at Goo Gle Aiworks.
- [29:41]
Alistair Campbell
So yesterday, what did you make of it? So there's Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office. They set out a 20 point plan for peace in the Middle East. My old friend Tony Blair, as we had previously suggested might happen, is named as being on this board of peace that will be chaired by Donald J. Trump if it comes to fruition. I mean, I think if is a big word in this. I sort of felt, reading, I've read the, we'll put it in the newsletter, the, the, the full 20, 20 points. I couldn't help reading it with a, with a kind of Northern Ireland history kind of in my head and virtually every point that is made, you keep thinking of, of who will have a problem with it, how difficult that might be. So look at, listen, it was a big, it was a big moment and fair play, you know, keep trying, but it's hard to be very, very optimistic.
- [30:41]
Rory Stewart
Well, well, let's start with the Northern Ireland thing because that's the first thing that's so startling about it and must have surprised you reading it. So the first thing that's astonishing compared to Northern Ireland is that the Palestinians are not part of the negotiation. This is a peace deal that's been put together between Israel and the us. So imagine putting together a Good Friday agreement which the Republicans didn't get involved in negotiating. The IRA were not involved, Sinn Fein were not involved. But it's requiring Hamas to do all these things in particular, disarm, get rid of weapons. Now think about your Northern Ireland experience again, what did it require to get the IRA to agree to decommission weapons? Well, they had to feel that they had made a huge advance in terms of their political objectives to get rid of them. And there were still factions within them that didn't want to get rid of weapons. And there was a very, very difficult, long decommissioning and inspection process. Hamas is apparently supposed to get rid of all their weapons in 72 hours. Having achieved what exactly? And that's the next thing, because this feels like a. Or will feel, I'm going to play devil's advocate here to certainly somebody on the Hamas side as a surrender document. A lot of the concessions that the press are claiming Israel's making will not feel like concessions at all. For example, Israel agrees to let in humanitarian aid, or Israel gives up on the idea of ethnic cleansing and expelling all the Palestinian population from Gaza. Well, many people, not just Hamas, many people in the world of even nine months ago would say, hey, hold a second, those are norms of international law, right?
- [32:22]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah.
- [32:22]
Rory Stewart
Getting food into people and not ethnically expelling them, that's not a concession. That's the bare minimum that you should have been doing anyway in terms of legal obligations. Now, what are the concessions that Netanyahu made? Well, he will make a lot of the fact that he had to apologize to Qatar for striking them. And he doesn't usually apologize. But again, what's that got to do with Palestine? Not much really. It's about Qatar. Secondly, he's had to accept that if Hamas fighters lay down their arms, there could be an amnesty and some of them can leave. That might be unpopular with some people, and then there's some reference to a path towards the state. But I don't think anybody, even on the right of Israeli politics, is going to believe that any of this is a guarantee. And the final thing back to you is if you think about the Good Friday Agreement, how long it took and how many details there were, it wasn't a 20 point plan. Where are the guarantees? Right. This was the key point with the north, your Good Friday agreement. If people didn't do things, what are the consequences? Who's following up? What are the guarantees? Let's say Hamas releases all the hostages and Israel then decides not to release the prisoners. Netanyahu says for whatever reason. Well, anyway, Hamas are a bunch of terrorists. They don't deserve to get themselves back. We've got our hostages back. They can go screw themselves. What are the consequences? What are the guarantees?
- [33:42]
Alistair Campbell
That's what I meant by if you go through every single section of the plan of all 20 in every one of them. You can see what ifs that could lead to it being tipped up. So, for example, you mentioned Palestinian state. And just going back to Keir Starmer's speech, that was one of the standing evasions during the speech when he simply stated that, you know, we now recognize Palestinian state. But Netanyahu has since done an interview, since being in the Oval Office and since doing this thing with, with Trump where he's basically said there's no way there's going to be a Palestinian state. And the other point that you make about the complication of this, so I can't pretend to know as much about hammers as I maybe do about Irish Republicans and the ira. But the process by which the IRA took step by step to eventually saying, okay, we'll put arms beyond use, and then the decommissioning process, that was painful, it was slow and it was grinding. And Donald Trump did one of his little doorsteps just before Keir Starmer's speech, and he was asked by an American journalist, TV journalist, whether there was any room for negotiation or whether this was just take it or leave it for Hamas. And he said, well, there's not much room. It's pretty much take it or leave it. And of course, and then. And the other thing that's happening now. So CBS ran a report. It was. I don't know who the source was, but it said a source involved in the negotiations. And I'm just thinking, well, cbs, maybe it's an American says Hamas is leaning towards acceptance. I said, really? So I then sort of, you know, called around a bit and spoke to a few people and read a few things. And I mean, and the one that really leapt out of me was Hamas, a Hamas source speaking to Reuters. And that, to my mind, usually means that it's somebody who knows somebody at Reuters, and Reuters trust that person. And they've phoned them up and they said, this plan is completely biased towards Israel. It's imposed impossible conditions aimed at eliminating Hamas, and went on to say that all the Israeli demands have been met. There is no granting of legitimate rights to Gazans or Palestinians. And that may be a kind of exaggerated view, but you can see why they say that. And so this feels, hate to say this, because I think people both think that we can't see any good in Trump. I'm glad that he's still engaged. I'm glad that he still thinks he can get people together and try and knock heads together and get it moving. But it feels like something that has given him the opportunity to say, I'm still working on this and here's a real thought through plan. And then to be able to blame Hamas when, if they come back and say, look, this is unacceptable.
- [36:27]
Rory Stewart
Well, exactly. And so that is going to be right at the heart of the story. So if Hamas rejects this very, very quickly, the narrative coming out of Israel, the Israeli government certainly will be, well, we offered them, we offered them peace and they rejected it. So now we can continue doing whatever we're doing in Gaza and it's Hamas's fault because we offered them a peace deal. And nobody will read the small print, nobody will be interested in discussions about whether what they offered was reasonable. Nobody will be interested in the point that it wasn't actually negotiated with Hamas at all. The second question though, which I think you pointed to when you talked about Netanyahu rejecting a two state solution is, let's say, in a sense that's actually quite convenient for Netanyahu, Hamas rejecting this because it might help him with his own coalition partners who are a bit iffy about some of this stuff.
- [37:19]
Alistair Campbell
Just on that race, Bezalel Smotrich, he's one of the two big hardliners, he and Ben gvir, who really just don't want any truck with any talk of even sort of being nice to the Palestinians, let alone giving them a state. And he has called this deal a tragedy of leadership that lacks true vision. So that's kind of where that side of the politics is coming at Netanyahu. And meanwhile on the other side, of course he's getting it from people trying to push him towards accepting the deal.
- [37:50]
Rory Stewart
So let me just develop this. So there's meant to be 72 hours for Hamas to sign up. And if Netanyahu doesn't want them to sign up, all he has to do is keep making statements in that 72 hour period saying things like there's never going to be a two state solution, leaning into an Israeli interpretation of this document, making it seem more and more prose ready and unattractive. And the result will be that he can force Hammus to reject it and then say, well, Hammus rejected it and we can continue. So one question will be, does Netanyahu want this to happen or not? Because if he doesn't want it to happen, there's an enormous amount that he can do to make it less likely that Hamas will sign up to it in terms of what he says between now and when they sign up. Now let's just jump forward though, let's be optimistic for a second and assume that some agreement is reached. The next thing that I think we need to think about is your friend Tony Blair's vision. And a lot of this comes from work that he was doing that was leaked and that the Financial Times reply to. A lot of this plan comes from his work. He basically is envisaging a technocratic Palestinian government which oddly, or administration which is not Hamas, but is also not the Palestinian Authority, which incidentally, we all just recognized. So this hasn't been negotiated with the Palestinian state that France and Canada and Britain recognize, and the Palestinian state that France and Britain and Canada recognize, not going to be running this thing. It's this jet crate thing. And then there's going to be an international supervision council. You talked about that. Trump and Blair, how much time are they going to spend on this? And what does it really mean that Trump's chairing this thing? Is he running Gaza? How much time is he going to put into that? Then there's an international security force which looks like it's supposed to be Middle Eastern countries providing security. So it is, as we were discussing this a couple of days ago, has elements of the sort of things that happened in the 90s. So it feels a bit like the kind of projects that people were trying to do in East Timor, Timor Leste or Kosovo, Bosnia or Cambodia. But the problem here is that in those situations, there wasn't Israel. This all stands or falls on Israel. You've got a massive military power right on your border, who controls all the borders. So this document doesn't tell you, is the airport going to be opened? Is the port going to be opened? When is the Rafah border with Egypt going to be opened? At the moment, all access to Gaza will come through Israel. Israel retains the right at any moment. If they think the Arab security force is not doing a good job to intervene, presumably bomb, send in special forces. They will say very quickly, you said you'd disarm Hamas. You haven't. You said you'd get rid of the tunnels. You haven't. We can come in again, Right, So imagine you are that administration pretty quickly. You're dealing with a place that's taken billions upon billions of dollars worth of damage. You have a very angry, traumatized population. They will be demonstrating the streets. I saw this in Iraq, right, when we took over in Iraq, it almost immediately we couldn't get petrol to people. We couldn't get the schools up and running quickly enough. The electricity lines were coming down. I had thousands of people demonstrating outside my office. But I didn't have the added problem of people saying, and by the way, you're a puppet of an Israeli government, you're the puppet of what are basically our enemies next door. And the reason you're not doing these things for us is that you're working for their agenda.
- [41:19]
Alistair Campbell
I mean, I answer your question. How much time will Donald Trump put into it? I mean, he's a busy guy and he's the President of the United States. But I think one of the things that, you know, came across really strongly yesterday was the extent to which he wants to be seen to be the only person who can really, really sort this. And if you go through the paper, I mean, as you say, these are really, really, really difficult, complicated questions that are going to require some of the best brains in the world to try and actually get them to work. Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic apolitical Palestinian committee responsible for delivering the day to day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza.
- [42:02]
Rory Stewart
Can we do one at a time? Can I just start on that one? Let's do one at a time. I think it's really interesting. Okay, so couple of questions on that. Who chooses these people? In other words, do they have legitimacy? Will the people of Gaza see these people as legitimate representatives? Number two, how do they deliver those services? Get the schools up and running, get the hospitals up and running? What kind of civil service do they have? It was a Hamas civil service. So two questions for you. How are they chosen and how do they get anything done?
- [42:28]
Alistair Campbell
Well, the one I would add to that is in the context of where we are now, the concept of apolitical Palestinians is, I think, quite hard to get my head around that one. I mean, the answer to your question is that those questions have not been answered. Goes on. The committee will be made up of this partly answers your question, but it doesn't answer it fully. Of qualified Palestinians and international experts with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, that's the body of peace, Trump, Blair, etc. The body will set the framework. This body, and I think that means the international body will set the framework and handle the funding for the redevelopment of Gaza until such time as the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program as outlined in various proposals. So that is basically saying that the Palestinian Authority, which, which Israel thinks is just a complete sort of bunch of corrupt gerontocracy which America has refused to give visas. Is it the same Palestinian Authority? Are we talking about a completely different Palestinian Authority?
- [43:32]
Rory Stewart
So two more questions I guess that come out of that. Number one, what's the legal status of this body? I mean, if we were doing this in the 90s, there would be a lot of international lawyers thinking about international law. Is this a U.N. body? No, because Trump and Israel don't like the U.N. that would be the normal way to do it, right? Be UN body.
- [43:50]
Alistair Campbell
Although the UN are specifically named in relation to distribution of aid.
- [43:55]
Rory Stewart
Yep, very good. They're doing their humanitarian stuff. But what's the legal status of this organization in Iraq? Remember Bremer, the American representative had to set it all up under Jay Garner and then Bremer under occupation law. So they were formally the occupying power under international law with all the responsibilities that go with being the occupying power. Is this the occupying power or is Israel the occupying power that is granting power to this transitional authority to act on behalf of Israel? Next question. They say that they're going to have all the money. Where's the money coming from? Well, one thing we know about Donald Trump is he's not providing any money. One thing we know about Israel, they're not providing any money. They've made it completely clear that despite the fact that the reconstruction of Gaza is reconstruction against the bombing that Israel has done, there is nobody in the entire Israeli political spectrum that is suggesting we reconstruct. Now remember, that's another thing, I was reading quite good Times of Israel piece about this when many people, David Mentzer, for example, will say, well, we're not doing anything different in Gaza from what the Americans and British did in Germany during the war. The difference is the British and Americans were committed to reconstructing Germany after the war, but Israel is not committed to reconstructing Gaza. So presumably the answer is they're hoping the money is going to come from the Gulf Arabs.
- [45:15]
Alistair Campbell
Well, hold on the next paragraph. A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energize Gaza will be created by convening a panel of experts who've helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East. I'm assuming this is the sort of stuff, the work that Jared Kushner's been doing. Many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas have been crafted by well meaning international groups. He's becoming a bit of a word seller this and will be considered to synthesize the security and government's frameworks to attract and facilitate these investments that will create jobs, opportunity and hope for future Gaza.
- [45:56]
Rory Stewart
On that one, here are the questions then. What's the miracle? Well, the miracle presumably is Dubai. What is Dubai? Dubai is above all about security. It's about international capital and visas, Huge numbers of expatriates, and it's about very, very open trade and borders. Emirates Airline, huge international port. But the problem for Gaza is there's no security. The borders are controlled by Israel. There's no suggestion that they're going to allow airports or ports to open. So how do you pull off the economic miracle?
- [46:27]
Alistair Campbell
You put it off, Rory, by having a Trump economic development plan. It then says a special economic zone will be established with preferred tariff. Tariffs get in here. Preferred tariff and access rates to be negotiated with participating countries. No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. Now, where it gets then, I think really, really, really tricky. Okay, as if it isn't tricky already. Hamas and other factions not named agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza directly, indirectly, or in any form. Now, just imagine the discussion that that set off in Gaza and the west bank and in Qatar. Now, just imagine that. That is Hamas and other factions agree not to have any role in the government's directly, indirectly, any form. Any military, terror and defensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors. Where do they come from? Which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use. That's the phrase that we used in Northern Ireland. Through an agreed process of decommissioning supported by an internationally funded buyback and reintegration program verified by independent monitors, New Gaza will be fully committed to building a prosperous economy and to peaceful coexistence with their neighbors. I mean, it's putting an awful lot on a lot of people to say, yeah, I'm going to go along with all of this.
- [47:58]
Rory Stewart
Demobilization and disarming was done. Obviously, you very much were involved in that in Lord Nyland, but it's something that requires security forces, requires police, requires armies. In the Balkans, it was done. The army was demobilized, but that had tens of thousands of international troops on the ground and a huge mandate mission around that. You controlled the borders in the case of the Balkans and in the case of Northern Ireland, and there was political will in the general population to drive ahead with that. So who is doing it? I mean, let's say a sort of provisional hammer emerges like a provisional IRA and says, well, wait a second, we don't like this deal. We're not disarming. Who's got the job of taking their arms away who's got the job of blowing up the tunnels? No. And ideally, from Trump and Netanyahu's point of view, they hope this is going to be the Arab security force. But that puts the Arab security force in an impossible situation because you're asking them to basically fight Palestinians, Arabs fighting Palestinians. And it will be presented as Arabs fighting Palestinians on behalf of Israel. So it'll be almost impossible for them to do that.
- [49:12]
Alistair Campbell
Well, again, this goes on to say the United States will work with Arab and international partners to develop a temporary, temporary international stabilization force to immediately deploy in Gaza. The ISF will train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces in Gaza and will consult with Jordan and Egypt who have extensive experience in this field. This force will be the long term internal security solution. The ISF will work with Israel and Egypt to help secure border areas along with newly trained Palestinian police forces. I mean, again, if I we go back to the Northern Ireland, the concept of policing and who police is and where they come from and how they're trained. This is not going to get put together in a few days.
- [50:02]
Rory Stewart
Just quickly on that one. I mean, I think you've made this point really powerfully, which is that we forget that the government in Gaza for the last 20 years has been Hamas. And Hamas is everywhere. I mean, people working in education departments, in municipalities are Hamas people. They defeated Fatah in an election, defeated the guys who were running the Palestinian Authority in election. And there was the civil war where Fatah and Hamas were killing each other. So your point has knobs on, right? Who is the new civil servants and who are these police and who are they associated with and who supports them when they get into a fight? And how do you win the battle for hearts and minds? Because this is also a counterinsurgency campaign. It's a starved, traumatized population with huge resentments towards Israel and the international community. So how do you deliver development quickly enough to win them over? And that's what we failed to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. You know, very quickly people said where are the jobs and where will the jobs come from? There will be, I don't know, there'll be youth unemployment rates of 30, 40% in Gaza. Who's going to create those jobs doing what? Look, let's say you and I suddenly got idealistic and wanted to move to Gaza and help with this project. Very quickly you would realize that almost every conversation goes back to Israel. Let's say you got tariff free agreements to, I don't know, manufacture textiles in Gaza or you were trying to run IT companies in Gaza, or you were trying to do transshipment trades of chips from China into Europe and everything is stopped because the airports don't function, the borders don't function, or let's say you've got migrant laborers trying to bring salaries in. It's all controlled by Israel. And Israel won't give up that control because if you hear it from their point of view, they see it as vital to their security that they don't give up that control.
- [51:54]
Alistair Campbell
Right. So it goes on. Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza as the ISF establishes control and stability. Easier said than done. The idf, the Israeli Defense Forces will, will withdraw based on standards, milestones and time frames linked to demilitarization. That will be agreed upon between the idf, the isf, the guarantors, and the United States with the objective of a secure Gaza that no longer poses a threat to Israel, Egypt or its citizens. And just on that, the standards, milestones and time frames, I mean, what are they? How do you negotiate each one? There were some maps produced with the paper and it showed a sort of plan for how the Israelis might start to pull back. But what happens when there's a fight between some of the Israelis and some of the Palestinians? What's going to happen when the unexpected. The unexpected takes place, which is bound to do. So I think in all of this, it's all this. Is this written for a perfect world? This is a good plan. Okay. But it is so not a perfect world. And I think that there's. I just. I'd love to think that the work has been done that answers these questions, but I haven't seen it yet.
- [53:12]
Rory Stewart
Yeah, I guess we've probably driven our audience mad with our detailed questions, but if we just, just go back to the big picture. Two quick observations. One of them is, remember there were January and March ceasefire deals and they basically said two things which have gone from this deal. In some ways, the deal's got worse. In the earlier versions, Hamas were going to release their hostages at the same time as the Israelis released the prisoners. This requires Hamas to release its hostages before Israel released the prisoners. Requires an element of trust which wasn't in the earlier deals. Secondly, in those earlier deals, the answer to your question on when Israel withdrew, well, that was tied to the hostage release. Israel was going to get its troops out at the same time as the hostages were released. In fact, Hamas wasn't going to do any of these things until Israel withdrew. Now we've got a situation where Israel basically says, we're going to be there. And we won't tell you how long. Final thing is at the root of the problem is that the Palestinians are not in the negotiation. I mean, you don't have to be like a sort of super politically correct theorist of peace building to understand that the idea that you can negotiate a peace deal without having one side involved is kind of madness. And there's none of the international legal or UN structures around this. It's a real sign of how much the world has changed in the last nine months that this is even conceivable as a deal. I mean, it's very, very weird that we're in a world now where we're sort of respectfully talking about something which I think even 12 months ago, the whole world would have been like, this is not the way you do peace deals.
- [54:49]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah. And of course, what happened on the back of it, I mean, they put a lot of work into this. I mean, the positive reactions sort of came out flooding out straight away. But just because people react positively in the moment doesn't necessarily mean that these things are going to happen. And my final point, I don't know if you had time to read it, but I sent you a. An analysis piece from the Times of Israel, and it was clearly, I think, spun from the kind of, you know, the Israeli government perspective. And the headline was, Netanyahu Secures Key Edits to Trump Plan to Slow and Limit Israel's Withdrawal from Gaza. It says Netanyahu was bullish as he left the White House and then goes through these areas. He's seen drafts that have then been slightly watered down. And Netanyahu did a video. Now the whole world, including the Arab and Muslim world, is pressuring Hamas to accept the terms that we created together with Trump to bring back all the hostages, the living and the dead, while the IDF stays in the majority of the Strip. And then he said in Hebrew, who would have believed it? In other words, trying to give the sense to the Bengavis and the Smotrich. I've got everything that you guys wanted.
- [55:59]
Rory Stewart
Me to get just on the comments, just to bring in the live audience a little bit. Ronnie Farhi has written in just a minute ago saying it's pretty sick how your hatred for Trump overpowers your basic humanity. It's progress and the international community on both sides back. But you cannot for a second give some kudos. And then, Vasilis Antonopoulos, if you think nothing will work, what do you propose? Okay, my answer to that is, we do know how these things are done. And the answer is, you have a proper process in which you involve the Palestinians. It's not rocket science. The idea that you can get a peace deal basically taking the demands only from one side, is completely mad. It would be like making a Northern Ireland peace deal, which was written by the British and the Unionists. It would be like, I don't know, a Balkans peace deal just written by the Bosniak Muslims. Secondly, you get the international legal structures and the UN involved, you don't hatch it up as the deal between Netanyahu and Trump and then give all the cards to Netanyahu to determine whether or not it's accepted. So the fact that it's pushing for peace is not enough for us to say, this is a good deal. There are many alternatives.
- [57:10]
Alistair Campbell
No. And also, I mean, I sort of acknowledge the first point. I actually said that I think a lot of our listeners probably do think that we're so sort of biased against Trump that we can't see any good in him, which is why two or three times I've said, actually, I think it is a good thing that they keep trying, that they keep going. But I think it is when you are talking about something as important as this on a day, by the way, that the numbers of people who have died of malnutrition in Gaza has now reached 453, 150 of them children, 70,000 deaths, then I think we're entitled to probe and press the detail of something, which I do welcome. I do welcome the fact that they've set out this plan. I think it is not unreasonable then to say, okay, these are the questions that flow from it. And therefore, I think that in terms of, you know, what would we do? I think you would try to build proper international support for the sorts of things that are in this plan. What you can't do is just say, this is what we think should happen, and therefore it will happen. It doesn't. The way life doesn't work like that.
- [58:19]
Rory Stewart
And politics, I mean, we are. The rest is politics are at the core of this, which is, it can't just be technocratic. There needs to be a Palestinian Authority with legitimacy that Palestinians can get behind. Right now, obviously, that's not going to be a Hamas government, but it's. At the very least, we've recognized the Palestinian state should be the Palestinian Authority, saying there's not going to be a Palestinian Authority until the Palestinian Authority reforms and saying that allowing food in is something that they will allow as a sort of condition if they sign up for the peace deal. Is complete sign of how far backwards we've gone. No, that food, that humanitarian support should be there today, should have been there three months ago. And it is the most disgusting moral blackmail to be saying, we're going to continue to starve you unless you sign up to this plan. A final one. Sorry. Just to quote Maxine Thompson, who came in like Trump and Putin regarding Ukraine or Matt Lang, just like Russia and the US deciding fed Ukraine, we were very, very clear that the problem with Trump sitting down with Putin is that Zelenskyy wasn't in the room. The problem with Trump sitting down with Netanyahu is the Palestinians are not in the room.
- [59:31]
Alistair Campbell
But you weren't very happy about Tony Blair's role in all this, were you? Be honest.
- [59:34]
Rory Stewart
No, I thought it was extraordinary that he would do this. I think it goes against what he learned in Northern Ireland. Goes, would have learned painfully in Iraq, I guess will go against the instincts of Jonathan Powell, National Security Advisor. And I think it's a very strange thing for him to do. Puts him in a very exposed position, taking risk. I mean, the basic way I'd frame it is this, that if he does this, Tony Blair will have responsibility without power, the power will remain with Israel and he'll be carrying the can for things that he can't implement.
- [60:05]
Alistair Campbell
Yeah, well, I just think it shows his continuing commitment to public service home and abroad. What a fine man. Anyway, listen, thank you everybody for joining us. I hope we've, we've informed, elucidated and, I don't know, provoked a bit of thought.
- [60:19]
Rory Stewart
Well, you, you certainly will have provoked everybody with your final praise of Tony Blair, who I feel is not quite as popular as he is with you. Right, okay, thank you, Alistair, very much. Bye bye.
- [60:29]
Alistair Campbell
See you soon. Take care.
- [60:30]
Rory Stewart
Bye bye.
- [60:34]
Alistair Campbell
Foreign.
- [60:40]
Anthony Scaramucci
Hey, it's Anthony Scaramucci and I want to tell you about my podcast Open Book, which just joined the Goal Hanger network, which we're all very proud of. In my latest episode, I interviewed Goal Hanger's very own James Holland. We spoke about World War II and what World War II teaches us about today. Here's a clip. Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Well, I think he was a great man. I think he was a man of vision. He was a man of enormous geopolitical understanding, and he was a man who offered possibilities. When you're in a life and death struggle, you need people that can persuade you. You need people that can bind you. You need men of vision, of charisma. That's the problem with the moment, is we haven't got those guys. I mean, he's flawed, of course, all the great men are. But thank goodness for the developed world and the democratic world that he was political leader of Great Britain. And in 1940 and throughout the whole of World War II, he literally, in so many different ways, man of the century. I think because Roosevelt was a charmer. Roosevelt was a great strategist. He pulled the Americans through the Depression and helped him manage the war. But without Churchill holding ground in May and June of 1940, it would have been a much darker, much worse world. It would have been not a lot that the Americans could have done without Churchill's steadfastness and his inspiration to his, his fellow citizens. If you want to hear the full episode, just search open book wherever you get your podcast.
- [62:07]
Rory Stewart
You are not luminous, Watson, but you.
- [62:11]
Alistair Campbell
Are a conductor of light. Here they are. Dr. Mortimer, I presume.
- [62:18]
Rory Stewart
Yes.
- [62:18]
Alistair Campbell
Hi, John. Dr. John Watson.
- [62:24]
Rory Stewart
Who is your client? He was my client, Sir Charles Baskerville. Keep reading.
- [62:34]
Alistair Campbell
A local shepherd. Noted. I saw first that of the maid. Hugo Baskerville passed me thence on his black mare, and there behind him, running mute upon his track, such a hound of hell at God forbid should ever be at my heels. I wish I felt better in my mind about it. It's an ugly business, boss. An ugly, dangerous business. And the more I see of it, the less I like it. I shall be very glad to have you back safe and sound in Baker Street. Last one. Hello, Gohan. You're not Sherlock Holmes.
- [63:17]
Rory Stewart
I'm Henry Baskerville from one of the biggest audio dramas of all time.
- [63:21]
Alistair Campbell
Does it bother you? Like in a creepy kind of way? Like in there's an evil giant hound that likes the taste of Baskervilles kind.
- [63:28]
Rory Stewart
Of way, the seminal gothic novel by Arthur Conan Doyle.
- [63:33]
Alistair Campbell
They're watching.
- [63:34]
Rory Stewart
Who? Who?
- [63:34]
Alistair Campbell
Who are watching?
- [63:35]
Rory Stewart
It's not safe.
- [63:38]
Alistair Campbell
I could just make out its pitch black form. Welcome to deepest everything, a hellish void. Darkest this piercing yellow glow of eyes. Dartmoor. What do you want of giant fang? No, Sherlock and Co.
- [63:59]
Rory Stewart
The hound of the Baskervilles. Listen now. Five stars, says the Eye Paper. Hugely popular, says the Guardian. A successful reinvention of Holmes for a younger generation, says the Times. Search Sherlock and Co, wherever you get your podcasts.