Andy Burnham's 'Messiah' Complex could spell disaster for Labour | The Daily T

Kemi Baidnock's under fire for describing Bridget Philipson as a spiteful class warrior.

But Britain's strictest headmistress, Catherine Burblesingh, tells us that the education secretary means well, but she is harming poor kids.

She thinks that by bringing out various rules from central government that schools have to follow, things like banning us from being able to have more than three pieces of uniform, branded uniform, she thinks that's helping poor kids.What's unfortunate, I mean, I genuinely think that her What she wants, it's coming from a good place, right?She wants poor kids to have a better chance at life.

She just doesn't understand that the things that she's doing will actually harm poor kids.for responsible citizenship.

Correct, yes.

It kind of was founded by Philippa Stroud and Paul Marshall and others with the help of Jordan Peterson and it's basically got bigger and bigger as the people here have tried to make the argument for restoring the West from what Eric Kaufman once described as the great awokening.

It is very Christian and it is concerned with saving Western civilisation, which in this weather and this top, I'm not really into at the moment.I've got more of a Sufi vibe, I think, right now.Yeah, that's right.

Although if you can't save Western civilisation in linen, what can you save it in?This is not a time to be suited and booted, folks.Did you wear your kilt for Scotland versus Brazil last night, by the way?

No, I did not.It was super hot.My mind was just on keeping the dog cold.

You didn't even watch that Scotland match, did you?

No, I didn't.It was the great Scott.

I knew you wouldn't.

But I know they lost 3 -0 to Brazil.

Yes, that's right.

And I know they lost because I heard my neighbours cheering.This is how I've discovered that my neighbours are Brazilian through watching the World Cup.

I thought you were going to say your neighbours were English and they just hate the Scots as the Scots hate the English and therefore we're cheering them on.All right, your neighbours are Brazilian.Fantastic.And is it hot enough?That's the other question I need to ask you.

Ruddy heck.Ruddy heck.Last night was worse, by the way.Yes, it was.The problem is we are in the middle of the dome.

Yes.

And so we're not just getting heat, we're getting high pressure and moisture.So you've got a permanent headache.Listen to Michael Fish over here.

I love this.

Well, because I'm very concerned about my dog.Yes.I've been reading lots of tips and advice on how to cope and how to keep him cool.

Yes.

And of course, I keep waking up in the middle of the night and going to check and all these sorts of things.He's fine.Asleep with his legs in the air.But as I said on a previous podcast, I go in in the morning and I open the door to his room and it's like a fridge.

I keep on saying, you need to get into the dog bed with him.That seems to be the coolest part of your flat.

He's much happier than I am.

Me and my husband are rowing over who should leave the bedroom.It's like, it's too hot to have two people in one double bed.So I've said, you feel free to move.

Well, this is what Western civilization is about.This is Western decadence.I insist on sleeping under a duvet.

What?

Even in this heat.

Why?

Even completely naked, day I was born.So I have to get the room to a temperature where a man can sleep under a duvet because I cannot get to sleep under a sheet.It doesn't feel right.

Don't tell anyone here that I am sleeping separately from my husband because I don't think the Faith family and flag crowd here would appreciate that.I'd say at all costs, regardless of the weather, you must remain in the marital bed.Can we get on to the...We're going to speak to Katherine Birbal -Singh who's at ARC.She's speaking at the moment.We're going to catch up.

She's renowned as Britain's strictest head in charge of the McHale Academy, which is one of the most successful schools in the UK because of its extraordinary Progress 8 school, which for the uninitiated is the score that defines how a child starts at the school and then finishes.

We admire her and we fear her, which is how it should be.

Well, and we're going to get her onto the row between two other quite scaryKemi Badenoch and Bridget Philipson, because that row is deepening.But can we just talk about Rachel Reeves?Yes.I'm fascinated by the Chancellor now, repositioning herself as one of Burnham's babes.

This is a bit cringeworthy, Tim.It's been painful to watch because she doesn't have the elan to pull it off.

No.

But she wasn't present in Downing Street when the Prime Minister resigned.But she was present for the photo with Andy Burnham.with all the kids.And then she also, she was present at the Prime Minister's, well, third to last PMQs.Yes.But she didn't sort of smile or say anything.

And when it was over, he didn't even talk to her when he left.

And she looked a little bit tearful.

She did look sad.

Because Spadenock attacked her.

Yeah.

Said she was rubbish.

Now she is on a morning round of interviews in which she has said, I have a record.I would be quite keen to carry on, but I want to make it clear that I support the party leader.who I anticipate will be Andy Burnham.

Newsflash, you're losing your job, love.I'm so sorry about this, but it's now seemingly a two -horse race between Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband.Burnham is probably playing both off against each other.I'm getting the feeling that Streeting's likely to win it.Burnham's already spooked the markets himself with this whole, I don't want to be tested on the fiscal rules.So to then have Miliband, who really will spook the markets, because frankly, he's an ardent socialist.

What it's like as The Apprentice, our Andy has become Alan Sugar and he's choosing between two teams of the socially awkward lunatic Ed Miliband who nonetheless quite good at getting things done versus Rachel Reeves who's done what many Apprentice candidates do.She's terrible at it but she doesn't say a lot.No.So she somehow just slides through round by round and you eventually reach the final roundAnd you're like, how is she in there?She's still here and I'm not a hundred percent sure of what her name is.

Yes, that's right.

And this is the moment when she finally speaks and says, I think I've done a very good job the last few weeks.I beat Sasha on sales twice in a row.

I came up with the company name.Yeah, exactly.It's always I came up with the company name.

No one else would stand up.I stood up.Yes, you stood up and fell over.Horribly lost.Oh my goodness.In fact, you actually lost money on this task.

Can we also discuss all of the lefties wetting their pants over Badenock's quite brutal performance at PMQs.I mean they're discombobulating overnight on social media saying this is just, this is cruel.She's been so horrible to Reeves and Starmer and Burnham and indeed Bridget Philipson which we'll come on to.I'm sorry but this is absolutely ridiculous.There is no nastier brand of politics than the hand -wringing The right aren't just wrong but actually racist and bigots left.These people don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to criticising their enemies.

We've got a situation where Angela Rayner once famously referred to the opposition as Tory scum at conference.These people are in no position to lecture others on parliamentary or unparliamentary language.

Remember Lynch the Bitch, John McDonnell?Lynch the Bitch, that's right.He was quoting someone, they weren't his words, but he was quoting someone in relation to...

Was that about Esther McVeigh?

It was in relation to Esther McVeigh.

Friendly people.I mean, I remember getting hounded out of a bloody United meeting at a Labour Party conference simply because I had my telegraph lanyard on.I mean, these people aren't always warm and cuddly.So, of course, Bainock's job description is leader of the opposition.She's there to oppose.

It would be very strange if she stood there and said, this is a sad day for the nation.

Well, quite.But was the language unparliamentary?She called Bridget Philipson a spiteful client.warrior.She used the word traitor.She said they don't like it up them, which is actually something I said on X at the weekend about restoring Rupert Lowe.

I may take credit.Trademark Camilla.

But traitors was a reference to his backbenchers.It wasn't like someone accusing people of being traitors to their country.I mean, that could be regarded as whipping things up.But nothing, she said, was technically unparliamentary.As someone pointed out, there is a Venn diagram crossover between people who thought Dennis Skinner was hilarious.

Yes.

And Kemi Badenoch was awful.

Yes.

The double standard makes no sense.That's right.This is the beast of Bolsover.

Of course, who used to tear Tories to pieces.

But he used to puncture every speech by a Tory by saying something.cutting something from the front bench.

Yes.

There's really no difference.So there's hypocrisy there.But the Labour Party wants us to act as though this is their private funeral, as though they're not the government of all of us.It's an internal affair.Yes.And we should show consideration and step back and let them get on with it, not really comment upon it.

We should mourn the career of Keir Starmer respectfully.

Yes.But we should also just Just really get it together and admire Andy Burnham.What is wrong with us that we cannot admire Andy Burnham?Now, he did have a comeback to Kemi that was very good.

It was.Shall we just have a little listen to it?It was in regard to her suggesting that all he represented was eyelashes and a black t -shirt.

He flutters his eyes at the camera, points at his shirt and says...

It's dark blue actually.

But I looked at that and I thought, oh God, is this all looking like it's lacking a degree of seriousness?I mean, it's got quite a good social media thing going on, has it?It's got a good game.It's got a good online game.But do we want future prime ministers having a good online game or do we want them to actually have policies and ideology?

It's the world we live in now.

It's just a thought.Would we like them to have some conviction, some courage?It would be nice to have both.Some determination, some decision making.

It would be very nice to have both.leadership.It would be very nice to have both.

Or do we just want them to make really amusing videos?

It would be very nice if they could have both.But I think right -wingers have to be honest and acknowledge that this man has a different prospect to Keir Starmer and that in the last week, politics has radically changed.overnight.It's amazing how that just happens and you don't even notice it taking place.And there are some things which used to matter that don't.There are some things that suddenly matter much more and it's because there is now a man about to enter the ring who is quite good at this.

He might not be good at running a country.We shall find out.But he is good at politics, at empathising and communicating.And that will require a different style of politics from the right.I would remind you in the 90s when Thatcher stepped down, Kinnock was way ahead in the polls because at that point, I'm sorry to say this, everyone was sick of Margaret Thatcher.No, she thought she was the actual queen.

I was never sick of her.No, I know.But by that point, she was in her Gloriana stage being wheeled on in Elizabeth I style dresses.Love it.The poltacs and all this sort of thing.I know, there's much to admire.

You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.

But by that point, Neil Kinnock was actually more popular.The moment she was gone and Major came in, then Neil Kinnock's shtick didn't work anymore against a man who, by contrast, was very reasonable and pragmatic seeming.Well, that's a really good point.This is what will change.I can't wait to see that first PMQs when Kemi is lobbing these verbal bombs at a man who is capable of wittily batting them away.It's going to change the dynamic.

It's going to change the dynamic, but then you made a very interesting observation yesterday.if the battle now does become a kind of pure socialism versus capitalism fight across the dispatch box, because it could see some kind of Badenock revival if she handles it well.Now, I'm only referring to that because this is quite interesting from you, Gav.When Britons were asked if theyAndy Burnham would make a better PM than other party leaders, 43 % preferred Burnham to Farage on 23%.But then when it came to Burnham versus Baidnock, 32 % preferred Burnham and 28 % preferred Baidnock.

So sorry, not to blind you with numbers, but the public is basically saying, I think that Baidnock takes the fight to Burnham better than Farage.Can she cash in?Maybe.Maybe.We need to see, right?

Maybe.I think she's still like a car in early testing stage, right, if that makes sense.

Could smash straight into a wall.

Yeah, she's only had two years.Farage is a quantity that's very well known, has been around for decades.So I think people are able to make a more informed judgment on which person they prefer.But the whole reform pitch is at the Red Wall.Burnham is competitive in the Red Wall.At the same time, Farage has been hit with the accusation that he received £5 million and we don't know where it's gone.

It's not an accusation, it's a fact.He received £5 million, we don't know where it's gone.

I think it's increasingly harming in that, by the way.

I think it is hurting his image.

They tried to dismiss it, but it's kind of, it's squandered his sort of man of the people appeal.

Yes.

A little bit like Boris Johnson when he was driving around in that brie -ridden, clapped out old banger.

Yeah.

He was able to transcend his own class and education.among the working people because people thought, God, he's sort of gone into politics and doesn't have much money and maybe he cannot, you know, his whole life is chaotic and he dresses as if he's just, you know, had a rummage around a charity shop.Similarly, people looked at Farage and said, oh, look, he's left behind this big career in the city because he really cares and he's got moral conviction and he cares so much about Brexit that he's given it all up and now he doesn't really have a pot to pee in.And I think if you take five million, it's such a large amount of money.The Tories are loving this because they're now trying to depict him as just like the rest of them.He's not unique.

He's just on the take, like any politician is.

But also, I think there's evidence that reform's salience is linked to the salience of immigration.Yes.So when the country is very concerned about immigration, reform's lead strengthens.And I agree with you that I think the next election is more likely to be about pocketbook issues, if only because If we believe what Andy Burnham has said in the past, then he does want a more redistributive economics.

Yes.

And then we've got things like this.War on Isis, which I don't pretend to begin to understand, but I don't like the sound of it.It sounds bad.

But neither of us can count particularly well.

We need someone on the show to explain to us how badly this affects us because I really want to know.

How much of our hard -earned cash are we going to lose?Now, Tim, have you done your homework?You can't claim that Bertie's eaten it because we do need to speak to Miss Burblesinghe in just a moment.

Yes.

Be on your best behaviour.

Yeah.And we want to pick up on Labour's attitude towards schooling, Yes.And class.And this interesting tweet by an MP, who I believe you know.

Yes, I do.I played football with her, Anna Turley.

Anna Turley, who wrote, note to all the pearl -clutching Tories out in force today, you don't have to send your kids to private school.We have universal education provision in this country if you choose to do so The rest of us shouldn't pay for you to have a tax break for the privilege I pointed out to anna who i'm very fond of she's a really lovely woman and she had a lot of trouble under corbyn and Left the party and came back in.

I mean she got an academic scholarship to an independent school called ashford and Her parents took a choice there, didn't they?They said, should we take this academic scholarship because we've clearly got a bright daughter, or should we send her to the local comp?I don't like the sort of dishonesty around some of this state education that the cabinet has enjoyed, because a lot of it is selective schooling.

It's grammar school.himself went to a grammar school which then turned into a private school and he stayed on on a scholarship.So he technically attended both a grammar and a private school.

So there isn't just choice between state and private, is there?There's choice between state and state.There's choice between comprehensive and selective.And therefore if you're not going to condemn your own for those choices, why are you condemning people for privately educating their kids?They can choose how they educate their children.I've got two in private and one in state for reasons I can go into on another podcast.

But I just don't, you know, also, I think it's hypocritical to have enjoyed private education and then try and deny it of others.

I think the phrase tax break is also very misrepresentative because, for a start, no one else in the rest of the world has done this, I believe.

Well, they've tried it and it failed.

In New Zealand?

Yes.

So it's something which no one else in the rest of the world applies, but also it's not a tax break in the sense that you make money out of it.That's normally what a tax break means.Rather, it's that the government is choosing not to tax education in this regard by not applying VAT.

In the same way they don't put VAT on children's clothes.

Right, exactly.But I think she's also betraying how out of touch they are with the reality of independent schools, which is that they are now, well, in some places just dominated by foreign students and the super rich.And that's because they've become so expensive.But there is a layer of people who either choose or feel that a private school works best for their child because, for instance, they have special needs, special learning needs and things like that.which is why some Labour MPs have opposed the imposition of VAT on school fees.And what school fees does is it just for that group of people, it just takes it out of their reach.

And it's true the school system hasn't collapsed.That's true.No one ever said it would.The point was that for that layer of people, it's just made private schooling thatlittle bit less likely that they can afford it.So you're consigning education really to something which is for rich Chinese people.

Yeah, no, that's right.

And I just think that's unfair.That's a form of social engineering.

Let's take a quick break, have a biscuit and a glass of milk because Miss Burbleson will be with us in just a moment.Catherine Burbleson, lovely to see you here at the ARC Conference.You've just spoken.We've been speaking ourselves about the row overnight between Kemi Badenoch and Bridget Philipson and we really wanted your perspective on it.Beidnok called her a spiteful class warrior in the House of Commons.Some on the left have thrown their toys out of the pram and said it's unparliamentary language.

I know you have had some history with the Education Secretary.What's your take on it?

Well, I don't know about being spiteful, but she's certainly a class warrior.I think she would probably describe herself as one.I mean, you know, she believes that she's fighting for poor kids and that you know, in order to do so, they need to, for instance, slap VAT on the private schools because that will help to equalize things, you know.And she thinks that by bringing out various rules from central government that schools have to follow, things like banning us from being able to have more than three pieces of uniform, branded uniform, she thinks that's helping poor kids.What's unfortunate, I mean, I genuinely think like her, her, you know, What she wants, it's coming from a good place, right?She wants poor kids to have a better chance at life.

She just doesn't understand that the things that she's doing will actually harm poor kids.That's the problem.

And Kemi said afterwards in the House, it was something along the lines of, I will never stop fighting for children because you don't care.What was it, Tim?

She claimed that Bridget Philipson was actually ruining children's life chances.Is that fair?

I'd say ruining them.I mean, the fact is she's making them worse.As I've just said, she wants to help poor kids, but the things she's doing will actually make life more difficult for poor kids.So as an example, let me give you the example of the uniform.She thinks to herself branded uniform costs.Therefore, let me stop the schools from having too many branded pieces of uniform, and then it'll mean less of a demand of money coming from the families.

" She ignores the fact that the poorer families will be helped by schools in the first place, but to meet the amount of her uniform.I mean, my uniform, you're looking at about £70 to £80 depending on the sizes, but that's how much the uniform costs.So one, it's not way over the top in terms of expense, but two, schools will help families who are genuinely struggling with that issue.What she doesn't understand, because she's never worked in schools, is that uniform is how you sort out your behavior.If you have a failing school and the behavior is terrible, broken windows theory, you look after the tiny details.That means you look after the uniform.

You make sure that you look after those tiny details.If you don't have enough branded uniform items, you can't do that.Therefore, the behavior gets worse in schools.Therefore, poor kids suffer.She doesn't understand that she's actually making it so that poor kids will not achieve as much as they would do if they had branded uniform items.And I mean, that's a very short, version of what I would really like to explain, but that's the crux of it.

Now, it's not going to harm a school like mine, because I've already established the behavior, and I'm the strictest headmistress in Britain and all that, so it'll be fine.But for those schools that are trying to improve their behavior, this is a genuine problem.I have 1 ,000 visitors visit my school every year.Many of those teachers, most of them, the teachers come in from other schools and agree with me on this issue 100%.They say, this is a disaster.We don't know what to do in terms of ...

Headteachers are struggling because a lot of the teachersshe's decided to do.And she thinks she's helping poor kids.She's actually harming them.

You have said something really interesting, which is that you think middle class parents avoid your school due to snobbery.Can you explain that?

Well, look, all of my kids are ethnic minority, mainly working class kids, you know, from the inner city.I mean, there may be another reason, but my guess is that white middle class parents look at the kids there and think, I don't want my kid to go there.I also think they don't want them to go there because they think schooling is about something other than, you know, working really hard and getting great teaching.I don't know.I suppose they want rowing.

I don't know.

I mean, I don't really understand it.Admittedly, we don't have massive green fields.We are restricted in various ways.I think the quality of teaching and quality of discipline should be the number one thing that any parent should be interested in.But we have prioritized the wrong things as a culture.And in the West, if you're in China, you're in India, you're in Jamaica and Ghana, any developing country, all of those families know that what you're looking for is the best possible teachers, teaching well from the front, leading the learning and being the adult authority in the classroom.

and excellent discipline that goes along with that so that the kids can actually hear the teacher and can learn lots.For some reason, we Westerners don't value that.I think that's one of the problems with the West.I've just been saying it in my speech, that we have created a culture amongst our children that means our children grow up into young adults who are who are unable to hold the same sorts of values that we all had 20, 30, 40 years ago.People talk about Gen Z and why is Gen Z the way they are in the workplace.They're like that because of how they work.

up online and in school.

You see this everything you're saying makes perfect sense to me.But what critics of Michaela would say is because you define and promote those values you're attracting parents who share those values.And in a way it's a form of selection through the back door because you're attracting tiger mums and dads and therefore you're giving them an education which suits their values.and you're not perhaps attracting kids from parents who don't share those values and therefore they get left out.

The admission system doesn't work like that.We get a whole load of kids whose families haven't chosen us fourth, fifth, sixth.That's how it works.You choose your school, one to six.You get the same amount of chance getting into the school if you've chosen a sixth than if you've chosen us first.So it's just not true that those families...

So there's loads of families who have chosen our school first who do not get a place at the school.

And forgive me if you...

Because families who have not chosen us have got a place at the school.

Forgive me because I'd really like to know if you... have parents who are clearly not supporting their child in their education.What do you do about those families?Do you speak to the parents?How do you handle that?

Schools spend far too much time trying to please everybody.You can't please everybody all of the time.You need to be clear about what your values are and what you're offering.The children are with you all day, every day.You need to get the children on board.The parents, I mean, most parents you don't really ever hear from.

I mean, you know, it's the children who need to engage.And so in the end, you have children, we have children who will apologize for their parents' behavior.Wow.And that's because they buy into what the school's about.They know what they're getting out of it.So there are children who will come to our school, and then they don't want to be there.

Their parents will have perhaps signed up to some other school somewhere.When a place six months later comes up, they say to their child, OK, we can go.And the child says, no, actually, no, I'll stay now, now that they've realized what it is.And the only reason why the child didn't want to go there in the first place is because they hear these rumors.Oh, well, it must be a prison, strictest headmistress, all of that.But you'd be very welcome to come and visit us.

All of your viewers, very welcome to come and visit.All you have to do is go on the website, you sign up for a visit.We get a thousand visitors a year from all over the world.And there's a reason.Look, if you want to feel better about things, you look at the country and you think, what is going on?I'm telling you, come and see our school.

It will lift your heart and soul because you'll look at it and you'll think, Why don't the white middle classes want to send their children here?They're crazy.I think they're crazy.But I mean, it's up to them, obviously.

So, McKayla is very much open for business.Many schools are closed today, Ms Birbal, seeing because of the weather.You mentioned Ghanaian and Jamaican schools.I'm not sure that they close their doors if the thermometer tops 30 degrees.What do you make of this, the schools closing?

I think planning needs to be...So, we have air conditioning in our various different rooms.Obviously, we would never close.And when the snow is out, we never close.I mean, you know, obviously we are always open and the kids are there and they know it and they're working.to some extent, I have some sympathy, and this is coming from The Strictest Headmistress, I have some sympathy with those schools where, for those teachers who are in those classrooms, because the kids will literally be asleep on the desks, because the discipline isn't there.

Nobody's listening to anything.And then you think, what is the point of being here?Because everybody's just exhausted and nobody's learning anything, right?But if you've planned it, and you've made sure that you've thought sensibly about your budget, and you've put money into getting air conditioning and so on, now, obviously, We all want more money in schools and so on, and I'm not saying it's easy running a school.It's difficult finding the money to do things, but you've got to be prepared, I think, as a school leader for situations like this.I spend a lot of time thinking about my staff and their well -being.

They have a lovely staff room, the teas and the coffees and the air conditioning and lots of printers.The sort of thing, the photocopiers, breakingdown.I'm trying to, I want to make sure that they're looked after.And I think sometimes we can prioritize the wrong things in schools.And I very much do prioritize my staff.

People will think, well, what do you mean, prioritize your staff?I look after my staff, my staff look after the children.And I think too often people in school leadership roles are spending too much time looking after the children.That's not their role.Their role is to look after the staff and then the staff look after the children.And it means, you know, I remember the days when I was in the classroom and the kids would call me miss and then make a mistake and they would call me mum by mistake and so on.

You know, we've all been there.

I love them.But the fact is, the fact is that it's my role to look after the staff and we all need to know what our roles are.

Final quick question.The Prince and Princess of Wales have decided to send their eldest child, Prince George, to Eton.Should they have chosen Michaela?

Of course they should have chosen McKayla.

But is it OK that they chose this elite, privileged school?Some on the left have criticised that decision.

Parents can choose whatever school they want.

But to be honest, the teaching won't be as good at Eton as it is at McKayla.On that note, Catherine Burblesingh, thank you very much indeed for joining us on the Daily T. Thank you for having me.Coming up next, we speak to Sunday Telegraph editor Alastair Heath, who says Andy Burnham, if he becomes PM, is guaranteed to betray Brexit.We're at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship, or ARC, conference in West London.I'm with Alistair Heath, editor of the Sunday Telegraph.Let's talk about Burnham and Brexit, because you've got a big Telegraph event on Monday night.

It's at the Emmanuel Centre in London.Around seven tickets are still available, folks.

Yes, they are.Please buy a ticket.

Buy a ticket.

We've got a lot of people.We've sold hundreds of tickets already.So it's going to be a really, really big event, really great event.

How worried are you about Burnham if he becomes the next prime minister, as is he?increasingly likely trying to reverse the referendum?He came out with one line didn't he back in the day where he said I think the referendum will be reversed in my lifetime.

Yes.

But then he kind of peddled away from that in Makerfield because it's a 65 % leave seat.

Well, like with everything else, Burnham has had multiple views on every subject, including on Brexit.But clearly, he's a Remainer.Clearly, he's a rejoiner.Clearly, the Labour Party would love to get back into the EU somehow.The question is whether they dare or not.And my big worry is that Burnham is actually going to have a big bounce in the polls.

And it wouldn't entirely surprise me He might even call an early general election and so on.put into that manifesto much glitter ties with the EU.

But how can he do that if he gives a speech on Victory Day for him in Makerfield saying that that constituency, which is largely Leave supporting, which supported reform in the local elections, is the touchstone for his premiership?He was talking about that from the perspective of looking after the North and we've already heard him come up with ideas like parts of number 10 are going to be hived off to Manchester.OK, whatever.

That's going to change everything.

Yes.So far, so predictable.But if Makerfield is the touchstone and he wants to win the Red Wall back from Nigel Farage, then he's going to have to lean into Brexit, not remain.I don't quite see the political sense in all this.

Yes.I mean, I don't really see the political sense in any of this.I mean, you've got this incredible euphoria because this man, Bono, must have suddenly come down.You know, he may have gone to Manchester and now suddenly he's the messiah who's going to save the Labour Party.I don't buy that.That said, Compared with Starmer, who is completely incompetent as a politician and who, you know, in addition to having terrible policies, Burnham, obviously, by comparison, is much more charismatic.

And there's clearly going to be a bounce in the polls.But I think there's massively, massively, massively overrating Burnham here, right?I mean, the fall when it comes will be severe.The question is, when does it come?Is he able to, you know, increase his power in the short term?And I'm just very worried because I think the way the Labour Party is going is simple, right?

It's massively higher taxes on wealth and property.They all believe in that.They want to achieve that one way or the other.Much higher capital gains taxes, probably higher income taxes.Generally speaking, the Labour Party needs to tax a lot more because they need to spend even more on the NHS, on welfare again, because they're not going to reform welfare, we know that, and on defence because they want to spend more on defence.That's good, but I wouldn't put up taxes for it.

And the final area is the EU.They've all convinced themselves that the reason the economy is not growing is because we left the EU.That's not the reason.The reason is because we're highly regulated, highly taxed, you know, nothing can get done in this country and so on.But they're looking for some sort of magical solution to our growth woes.And Bernard will come along and say, that's it, I'm not Starmer, we've got rid of Reeves, we're going to get some growth now.

And of course, nothing will happen, because even if you borrow a few more billion pounds to spend on some overpriced, useless infrastructure projects, that's not going to create growth.

No.

So all of the incentive will be to listen to these ridiculous model building economists who come up with made up numbers saying, you know, Brexit costs X percent of the economy and stuff.And to get closer and closer to the EU, even though, of course, France and Germany are in crisis and are growing.They've got massive problems too.None of this makes any sense.

Well, also, we've got the fastest growth in the G7.But at the same time, we want to peg ourselves to people who have got less good growth.

Yes.I mean, obviously, obviously, if you go to the EU and you go to Poland, they're doing very well.Right.But if you look at France and Germany, they're doing very badly.Germany, in particular, is in a spiral of decline.Yes.

So the point is, I do not believe for one second that getting closer and closer to the EU again will boost our growth.But when you're the Labour Party and when you're committed to highertaxes and more and more regulation, and you still want to pretend that you're serious about economic growth, what do you do?You concoct a narrative about the EU.And that's why I'm concerned about that.

We're going to get on to who you think would be the preferred next Chancellor.I mean it could be a case of would you rather be shot or stabbed, but we will get onto that in just a minute.Just on the Burnham bounce, you just slipped into conversation there that there could be a snap general election.What's your theory behind that?

My theory is that Burnham will be at his peak in maybe two months' time, that he will win, he will make a speech, I mean, he's already won, but he'll actually become prime minister.Then he will make a speech.He will be funny and charismatic by comparison to Starmer.

Flutter his eyelashes.

Yes, a few percentage points of the population will move behind him thinking, well, OK, let's give these guys one last chance.And suddenly Labour will be at 27, 28 percent, maybe even 29 percent of the polls.You'll have the first polls showing Labour with Burnham ahead of reform.So there'll be panic in reform.The Tories will be will presumably be in third position by then.And it would look like neither Reform nor the Tories are ready for a general election, while Burnham is actually consolidating the Green vote, because the Green Party, I think, is imploding, is collapsing, because people have realised that Polanski is not exactly the sanest of leaders.

No, quite.And so therefore, you've got this very unusual moment where even if Burnham doesn't actually achieve anything, he's going to be much more popular.I suspect the peak of his popularity and the peak of the Labour Party's popularity, if one can talk of a peak, because we're not talking about very high numbers here.No, but it will come at conference.It will come, exactly.It will come September, October, that sort of thing.

And if you really want to take the initiative and go for it and have the legitimacy to tear up Stalmer's manifesto and go for broke on stuff like wealth taxes, rejoining the EU or half rejoining the EU, and you're putting up the top right -wingincome tax and doing all that sort of stuff, then would be the moment.And when your enemies are not ready, why not pounce?Gordon Brown the other day was saying, someone asked him, what advice have you given to Burnham?And Brown said, don't listen to me effectively.And to me, I read that as saying that Gordon Brown regrets not calling an earlier general election.

Hang on, if he goes fully leftwards, Then don't we have a straight fight between left and right, socialism versus capitalism?And actually, maybe Baidnok can cash in on that.We've got some interesting polling from YouGov saying that actually people would prefer Kemi Baidnok versus Andy Burnham than Nigel Farage versus Andy Burnham.Just part that in your mind.Does it make a difference, therefore, who the next Chancellor is?We're hearing that the idea of having Ed Miliband looking after the Treasury's coffers has been sidelined for the idea of West Street doing it instead.

And let's be honest, Streeting is owed somewhat because he's lent his support to Burnham.

Yes.

Indeed, the MPs are backing him.

Yes.I mean, it may well be worse Streeting, we'll see.But if I were Burnham, actually, I would engage in this display of strength.And I wouldn't actually give it to Streeting just to show that he doesn't owe anyone anything.

Who would you give it?

Someone like Yvette Cooper.

Someone like Yvette Cooper.So Burnham could re -flex his muscles and say, I won't be pushed around.

That's right.I mean, if I were him, I'd go for Yvette Cooper or somebody like that.like that.But look, I don't know what's going to happen.We don't know what's going to happen.From Burnham's perspective, Miliband's probably too powerful, too autonomous, got too many of his own ideas, former Labour leader and all that sort of stuff.

Plus, that's the first problem.Second problem, he will split the markets because the markets know that he's extremely left -wing and so on.So that's very dangerous.The markets would obviously prefer Streeting or Cooper or someone else like that.But I think at the end of the day, It won't make that much of a difference because, as I say, the Labour Party has become obsessed with taxing wealth.they become obsessed with taxing property.

I think we will end up with wealth taxes that are much, much worse than what we currently have.So, you know, obviously Reeves has introduced some so -called supplementary council tax thing.I think you're going to end up with a wealth tax, you know, maybe even to replace stamp duty.So people who are currently paying three, four thousand, five thousand pounds in council tax will end up paying fifteen, twenty thousand pounds a year.That sort of stuff will be like a nuclear bomb going off under middle England, especially the south and in London.So we're talking about a very, very important moment coming up, which is, will the Labour Party try and do what Lloyd George tried to do, what Clement Attlee tried to do, which is to completely redraw the economic underpinnings of our society?

Lloyd George tried to impose a wealth tax, he failed.Labour was talking about a wealth tax in the 70s, they never managed.No country's ever managed to do this, by the way.It always ends in complete catastrophe.But will they give it another go?I think they will.

And I don't really think it matters which of these characters ends up as Chancellor.When Ed Miliband was calling for mansion tax, which was the embryonic version of this, he was defeated.But the world's moved on.Things have moved more to the left.The Everton windows, you know, very damaged when it comes to the economy.

Gary Stevenson's seen as some kind of economic sage.That's where the world's moved to, Alastair.Thank you very much indeed.Good luck with your big Brexit event on Monday night.Tickets are available.

Please buy some.

If you're enjoying our journalism, why not sign up to From the Editor, our free email newsletter.Start your day with the latest news and opinion, plus our bite -sized puzzles.Scan the QR code to sign up free today.