Is Andy Burnham about to become Prime Minister? | The News Agents

The News Agents podcast is brought to you by HSBC UK, opening up a world of opportunity.

This is a Global Player original podcast.

Keir Starmer overseeing an election efforts that he must pretend that he desperately wants to win, knowing that basically what all of this is, is a slow motion frame by frame coup.

People are trying to get rid of Keir Starmer.They're trying to get rid of Keir Starmer because they think he's useless.So there's the old Lenin quote.There are decades where nothing happens and there are weeks where decades happened.This week, it's felt like a bit of both.Keir Starmer is still Prime Minister.

There is no leadership challenge.So nothing much has happened.And yet...

And yet, at the end of a week where the Labour Party has been convulsed, it finally seems they have a plan.And it's about a man.Andy Burnham, who finally has a seat to fight to get back into Parliament.We are therefore looking at a by -election the likes of which we have never seen before, where 70 ,000 people might be choosing the next Prime Minister for 70 million of us.Welcome to The News Agents.

It's John.It's Lewis.And we build today's episode as a question and answer to reflect on the week.And then the past 24 hours happened.And so we decided, well, we better bring you up to speed with what we think has happened and what it all means.And we're going to come to your questions and maybe our answers too.

in the second half.

I think they're doing it for us.And look, we're very, very, very, very, very grateful.Look, we ended yesterday's show talking about where streeting and about why he had done what he had done.That was by resigning from the cabinet.That was the main story at two o 'clock in the afternoon.By five o 'clock in the afternoon, we had said there was another story we had said earlier in that episode.

All eyes would be on Andy Burnham that if he chose to strike at that moment when Wes Streeting went at a moment of maximum Prime Ministerial weakness.If he finally revealed his hand, did he have a seat or not, then he would be putting himself in the best possible position for Keir Starmer to roll over and allow him to stand.Five o 'clock, what happens?Josh Symons, who was the MP for Makefield, near Wigan, not so far away from Andy Burnham's old seat in Leigh.He was a Keir Starmer acolyte until not long ago.You might remember Simon's resigned as a result of a scandal, which we might get into.

But he announced that he would be standing aside, resigning his seat, despite the fact he only got elected in 2024.for Andy Burnham.He was stepping aside to allow a by -election to take place so Andy Burnham can stand and return to Parliament and replace Keir Starmer as leader.Half an hour or an hour later Andy Burnham puts out a statement saying that he intends to put his name forward to the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party saying that he intends to stand in that by -election.Half an hour later, the Prime Minister, number 10, lets it be known that unlike last time when Andy Burnham tried to stand in the Manchester -Gorton by -election, Keir Starmer would not stand in his way.And so now we, as I say, have been set up for a by -election which normally seems so small and so trivial and the importance of which is over -egged, there will be nothing over -egged about this by -election.

We will have nothingseen anything like it before, I think, in our parliamentary history, when in effect one constituency will have a direct Prime Ministerial election or at least the veto of a potential Prime Minister because everybody knows that if Andy Burnham can win that seat in Makefield, a seat which is going to be hard for him to win because Reform did very well there at the last election, but if he can win there it seems absolutely certain that he will become the leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister.

I mean back in the day when I were a lad...We're going back a bit.by -elections were always the most extraordinary circus and they have become much less circus -like they've kind of they come and they go and no one quite remembers the big by -elections that have almost sort of had a seismic effect on our politics this by -election as a result of Josh Simon standing down has everything, I mean absolutely everything in it.And you know I said at the top that this has been a week where nothing has changed and everything has changed.I mean the fact that everything has changed and although Starmer is saying I'm getting on with the job, I don't want this madness, I don't want this chaos, the fact that number 10 has had to let it be known that they will not stand in Andy Burnham's way to go back to fight a seat in Parliament, when it was just a very few months ago that they absolutely blocked Andy Burnham's path back to Westminster, tells you everything you need to know.Starman knows that if he tried to block Andy Burnham now, it would be curtains for him, the backbenches would revolt, the cabinet would revolt, and so Andy Burnham will be back in Parliament and presumably the assumption must be if he wins this by -election and we should detain ourselves a little bit on the numbers there, then he will be challenging for the leadership and so I don't think this has quite played itself out.

We're in a bit of aholding pattern now because the RIP will have to be moved for the by -election and it's in the government's gift to decide the date of when that by -election will be.But Keir Starmer must know he can't put it off forever.Then the by -election has to be full.Andy Burnham has to return.He has to get 81 votes before he can mount a leadership challenge.

But that seems to be the trajectory that we are now on.

The NEC of course also have to approve his candidacy.It seems likely given that the Prime Minister is acquiescing now, I think that is a formality.But I think it's hard in a way to overstate the stakes for all the players involved.For Burnham, for Starmer, they couldn't be playing for higher stakes.This is a game now.It's not a game, it's the wrong word, but it's a contest.

It's a sequence of events which will determine the premiership.If Andy Burnham, I mean, the spin they're putting out, and you say we should talk about the numbers, John, it is true.Make a field near Wigan.It is not.If you were drawing up a list of potentially favourable seats for Andy Burnham to fight, there are definitely no safe seats at the moment.But my word, this is not a safe seat, right?

This is a very different seat, for example, as I said to Manchester Gorton.It's very white.It's very working class.It's very heavily Brexit voting, old coal mining area.And as I say, it's a sort of area you know, Burnham grew up not far from there, but it's the sort of area that has been drifting and drifting and drifting away from the Labour Party.The 2024 election, Labour got 45 % of the vote, 18 ,500 votes.

Reform got 12 ,800 votes.They weren't very far behind.That was Reform at the general election when Farage had just come back in and they were barely getting started.In the council elections that we saw last week, Reform got over 50 % of the vote.Now, Andy Burnham says if you're going toto his mayoral election, he did very well in the area.

And the spin they're putting on the selection of this seat, and presumably this has been worked out with Josh Simons, the spin they're putting on it is that if Burnham can win here, If Burnham can defeat Reform in an area which is so favourable to them, exactly the sort of seat that they, in the Red Wall, true Red Wall seat that they would be looking to pick up at a general election, it will be proof positive proof of concept that an Andy Burnham led Labour government is the government and is the Prime Minister that the Labour Party not only needs, not only needs, but must have in order to defeat what they see as the ultimate, ultimate danger, which is a Farage government.And so this seat in a way they're saying it's better for Burnham to fight if he can win it than say a more typical Labour inner -city seat which is more diverse.

So Wes Streeting has just quoted, and so you feel reading that that where Streeting has made his own complicated calculation that maybe the best thing that can happen is for Andy Burnham to come back and that, you know, does he fight him or does he just think I'll get a good cabinet job?having tweeted that and having presumably gone up to Makefield and canvassed for Andy Burnham in that by -election.

Yeah, I mean, Wes Streeting's allies this morning were still briefing that, you know, Wes has got the 80, the votes, he will definitely contest, when and if there is a contest, he will contest it.I don't know, I mean, like, if that's true, Streeting is pretty much the only candidate for election in history that I can think of that has waited for the peoplewho is almost guaranteed to beat them to enter the race before they themselves go in the race like it's a it's a it's a weird thing to do I mean honestly I think and my sense talking to people last night I think if Burnham can pull this off and I say the stakes are so high for him obviously his political career finished I think if he loses it he'll still be mayor of Greater Manchester And I'm sure he'll say, well, it was Stalmer's fault.But, you know, there's no route back into Parliament, I think, for him this side of the next general election, any hope of his becoming prime minister gone.But if he can pull this off, honestly, it feels to me almost as the Labour Party might actually come together for a coronation and that there would be real advantages in doing that.Because, of course, if you do that, you obviate the need to have a prolonged maybe two, three months going all the way over the summer government slamming down into paralysis, you know, contest.

So I would not be surprised that I think the shock of that, the thrill of that, the surprise of that, the hope of that moment after these terrible election results with the Labour Party being in the doldrums for so long.King of the North coming down to Westminster to be crowned as Labour Party leader.I would not be surprised if we saw that at all in those circumstances.

the fact that this is just unprecedented, that you will have a by -election where you're not voting for a Member of Parliament, you're voting for a Prime Minister.The poor people of Makerfield.

Honestly, if you don't like politics and you live in Makerfield right now, I would go on an eight -week holiday.

Yeah, find a cruise.They're quite cheap at the moment, my understanding is.Find a cruise, but honestly, get yourself out of the way because you are not going to be able to move.For idiots like Lewis Goodall and me, and endless politicians knocking on the door, knocking on the door, so many leaflets coming through your letterbox, so many calls.Oh my god, are you going to be inundated right now?But, you know, as you say, you're voting for a Prime Minister.

And I do think it says something about our democracy.My favourite little factoid is, I was trying to think last night, I was thinking, who was the lastPrime Minister who came to power via an election and lost power via an election, you know, via a general election?You have to go back to Edward Heath.I think you have to go back to 1970 for the last person to come to power by winning a general election and losing power by losing a general election.And that is astonishing.

You know, you vote for Blair, you get Gordon Brown.You vote for Cameron, you get Theresa May.You vote for Theresa May, you get Boris Johnson.And then you get Liz Truss.And then you get Rishi Sunak.And now you voted for Keir Starmer.

And who are you going to get?

A guy elected by the people of Makefield in a by -election.I mean, it would be completely unusual.And something else is unusual.I mean, just the practicalities of this, right?I mean, obviously, the Labour Party is going to have to throw everything at this.And you're going to see all the MPs up there, you know, the whole of the Labour Party machine up there.

Who is the leader of the Labour Party, Keir Starmer?who will be overseeing this, overseeing an election effort that he must pretend that he desperately wants to win, knowing, knowing that basically what all of this is, is a slow motion frame by frame coup.I mean, if anything, I mean, it's very Keir Starmer.It's very step by step.

It's very process driven.I'll follow the rule book and I will be a part of my own downfall.

But that's what it is.You know, he has now got to oversee and orchestrate the election process, overseeing, you know, party HQ with all of its resources, putting all of its resources forces into the contest and an election effort that by definition is about his own removal.We've just never seen anything like that.And if you're Starmer, he's had to acquiesce to Burnham's candidature because he's so weak.What do you hope for here?Because I think he's damned either way.

I think if Burnham gets in, if Burnham wins that, I think as I say, I think sooner or later, and it will be sooner, you know, Burnham will stand and he will be removed.He's got the numbers in Parliament.There's almost a consensus, I think.not consensus, but you know, a decent majority for him within the PLP, particularly in those circumstances.It reminds me a little bit of Boris Johnson in 2019.There are people right now who aren't natural Andy Burnham people, but who have started to think we need Burnham to survive.

That's exactly what happened in 2019 when Johnson was king over the water.People who weren't natural Boris Johnson people came round to him because the situation was so desperate.I think the situation is analogous.But if he loses, if Burnham loses, that's also terrible for Starmer because Starmer will be blamed.And I think then you will get the horror the terror within the Labour Party of, Jesus Christ, if Burnham can't win in these seats with his profile and how popular he is, if he can't win, there's no way in hell we can win.No one can win.

We're doomed.And that will, I think, set off a cascade, an emotional kind of chain reaction that one way or another will lead to a, I think, bloodier and more divisive contest.So I think for Keir Starmer, one way or the other, I think he's doomed by these events and he's now, I can almost feel a power starting to ebb and flow away.He's a bystander on events now.He's not central to them.For the next few weeks, I suspect it'll be about eight weeks or so, the centre of the political universe in Britain is not going to be Westminster.

It's going to be Manchester, well, Makefield, yeah.It's very interesting to think what does Keir Starmer do now?given the way that the pieces are obviously going to fall over the next eight weeks.I can't help think that this kind of maintaining that I'm getting on with the job, there is no vacancy, nothing is going to change.I carry on as normal.I'm going to be fighting the next election.

And I'm going to be prime minister for 10 years.It just sounds so ludicrous, so fanciful, so preposterous.that that will have to change and I wonder whether To give the Labour Party to give him some agency over it will say right if you just say you will be gone by whenever it happens to be party conference party conference or you know the end of the year and then we will not do anything.We will try to make it as orderly as possible and then we will try to show to the public because I think the last week has been a horror story for Labour politics when you've come into power saying you're going to kind of let politics will tread less heavily on people's lives and it's just been the complete opposite and it has been every much every bit as much of a shit show as the downfall of Johnson and the kind of chaos that ensued then.This has been an appalling week for the Labour Party and I think that if there was a there was any kind of sense in all of them and I heard Steve, I mean actually it's probably worth listening to Steve Reid, Housing Secretary on the on the radio this morning.He is Nadine.

Yeah exactly just out there to try and calm everything down.

There is no leadership challenge.I'm a member of the cabinet and I've come on here to talk to you about the problems that we had last week but also the need to focus on delivering change and what I've done is yesterday my department introduced the social housing bill into Parliament so we can get more council homes built and tackle the housing crisis that is facing this country.The British public want us to focus on the problems the country faces, not talk to each other about cabinet top trumps.

he'sGDP figures and then you get the coronation of Andy Burnham assuming he's won the by -election.

from the by -election on day one to launch a leadership campaign, but who knows?

And then be bound by collective cabinet responsibility.

And so you bring him into the tent and that would put Burnham in a difficult position and might buy Starmer a bit more time, particularly if this by -election, I mean, look, if they move, where are we now?Mid -May, I mean, presumably this could come late June or early July, maybe they could push it a bit further, get close to the recess as possible, stop pesky MPs from plotting.As you say, it's in the government's gift.So, you know, that is all possible.I think that, you know, Starmer is now in this position where he's basically going to have, and again this is something else totally weird right, he's basically going to have the two main forces for this by -election, Labour and Reform, in their own way both campaigning that a vote for them is a vote to get rid of Keir Starmer.You know, it just so happens.

What's weird about that is that one of those parties is Keir Starmer's own party, because it's clear both how Burnham and Reform will attack this, the contours of their campaign.Burnham will not say it explicitly, but everyone will know.And this is what is completely unique about it.He's basically running as a sort of counterinsurgency force from within the Labour Party to depose the incumbent Labour prime minister.So he has a sort of anti -system kind of feel.And Reform likes that.

will have a sort of insurgency feel, because they will say, These games the Labour Party's playing, these games they're playing with you, you know, trying to sort of fix elections, have an MP resign and then come along and parachute this Red Prince in to be Prime Minister.Just tell her, just, you know, stick, give them the V sign and tell them that you're not interested.But, you know, so in their own way, they'll both be playing kind of slightly populist, anti -system politics all in their own way against Keir Starmer.

And also just think of the other parties in this by -election.By -election C, lot of tactical voting.If you want to just screw with the Labour government and the Labour Party you're going to vote reform because you're going to think that is the best way of stopping the return of Andy Burnham and creating maximum chaos in the Labour Party.We'll be back after the break with your questions.

Morning news agents.Name's Braden from Minnesota, and I'm a listener since your AmeriCast days.My question is this.Does the fact that Starmer can't or won't criticize Trump prevent him from tying Farage to MAGA?I know Trump's unpopular in the UK, so wouldn't that be an effective attack?

Thank you.Ameri -what?

Ameri -what?I never listened to them.What?

AmeriCast.It was a very trailblazing podcast that led to great things.So great that our first question on British politics and what's happening comes from Minnesota.

Well, I like to think it just sort of mirrors where we've been, that we managed to get a big uptick in listeners.So that is one of the reasons for some time I have been pitching that live show in Honolulu.Yeah, exactly.

We've got to get those Hawaii listenership.Yeah, Waikiki.We're doing very badly.Very badly in Waikiki.We'll definitely go there.Look, I think that actually, Starmer is trying to put some distance between himself and and Trump, not out of a deliberate strategy, but because of the way that the pieces have fallen as a result of kind of Donald Trump's war of choice with Iran and Britain not being part of it.

So I think he is sort of putting distance between himself and Donald Trump.But the interesting thing is, I don't know how closely you've been following it, Braden, but it sometimes feels as though Nigel Farage is trying to put distance between himself and Donald Trump, as if he suddenly recognises as well that being tied to Donald Trump is not doing Farage or reform any favours.

Yeah, I noticed the other day that, I can't remember whether it was Farage or someone, maybe it was Jeremy, saying that, you know, Farage had not spoken to Trump for months.You know, this is something Farage used to boast constantly.about not just his relationship with Trump, but his relationship with all of the kind of wider Trump network.I've known him for years.We've been going out for all this sort of stuff, you know, and you very seldom hear him say anything about that anymore.And that's because they know.

They know.I mean, they actually advert to why one of the reasons our country is is not America and not screwed or polarised in the same way, you know, even among reform voters, Donald Trump is very unpopular, even among reform voters.So they know that.And so there is a political mistake in clinging to too close for him.I mean, just sort of slightly linking back to our previous discussion, I think one of the, assuming there were to be an Andy Burnham premiership, or indeed anybody was coming to replace Keir Starmer, obviously, for the next couple of years, they would be dealing with Donald Trump.I would be genuinely fascinated.

And I don't know that I don't know what the answer would be here as to how they would choose to try and deal with that relationship because obviously we know how Starmer began that relationship.which was to try and be as close as possible to Trump, try and cultivate him, try and be, that disgusting phrase, a Trump whisperer.Obviously, that fell apart.Howard Burnham or someone else came along.How they decided to strike that balance and that relationship, I think, would be a really fascinating sort of part of that sort of part two of a Labour government.

Let's come to this question from Wim in Horsham.he's 74 years old, I can't help but recall the last time Labour tore itself apart, namely in the 1980s with the SDP split, militant tendency, Ben versus Healy etc.That was after Labour lost the 1979 election to Thatcher.The stresses in the party were there before that though, however Labour remained disciplined while in government with a very small majority.Why is it that Starmer has a huge majority and yet has so much party indiscipline?And is it because of the huge majority that there is such indiscipline?

I think it's a really interesting question, because I think that actually, if you look at the battles that are going on today, they're not as ideological as they were at the end of the 1970s, early 80s.Then it was about campaign for nuclear disarmament, whether you are a unilateralist or a multilateralist.It was this kind of the CLPD, the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, which was all about giving power to the ordinary voters in the Labour Party and how they should control the party and mandate MPs and MPs should face deselection if they don't do.And it was all about kind of...

Leaving the EC unilaterally without a referendum.

Exactly.All of those things.And so it was a real ideological split between the kind of Roy Jenkins, David Owen, Shirley Williams, etc.And the left of the party, which Tony Benn was the flag waver for that.And it just doesn't feel now that it's because there's a major ideological split in the Labour Party that people are trying to get rid of Keir Starmer.They're trying to get rid of Keir Starmer because they think he's useless.

I mean, that sounds really unkind way of putting it, but they just look at the way, you know, you look at Jess Phillips resignation letter or others or Wes Streetings, and it's not about kind of the direction of travel.It's just about the incrementalism.It's about the lack of decision making.It's about the lack of communication of a clear strategy.

Yeah.And I'll just repeat that I'm very struck by the fact that from across the factions, you talk to people privately in the Labour Party and their analysis and diagnosis and description of Starmer is remarkably similar and uniform, which it is basically almost about his capability of doing the job and the idea that he is too loyally, too passive, insufficiently political, inadequate, political instincts, all of these things, and communication, and it is as much as anything instrumental rather than ideological.And that is a sort of, just something that's shared across.That's not to say he doesn't have virtues, of course he does, but generally people just don't think he's up to it.I'd add one other thing as well, or two things, one that's a bit smaller about Stahmer and one slightly bigger thing.One of the reasons I think that Stahmer has struggled to impose his authority on the PRP is because so few of them believe that they really won their seats as a result of him.

You know, big landslide prime ministers, Thatcher, Blair, even Johnson.You know, when the chips were down, they and the whips would go to the MPs and go, you know, you're only here because of Blair, the prime minister, don't you?Or Margaret or whatever.You know, you won on their coattails.There was never, ever a sense of Starmer's coattails.There was a sense that basically anybody who is a reasonably decent leader would have won the 2024 election.

And actually quite a few of them often think that they kind of won maybe slightly in spite of Starmer, not because of him.inability to rely on your own personal authority, I think, is part of the reason.I think the other reason, which is not to do with Starmer, is I think, look, compared to the 80s, we are living in far more fractious times and we are living in a period where the two -party systemappears to be breaking down, which is creating chaos.I mean, if you think about the 80s, think about the number of seats on both sides.What you had, although it was very ideological, it was volatile, the politics was volatile, but what you did have was basically a class -based politics, which basically led to two -party and a bit system, where at least, I mean, let's at least a third of the MPs on either side, two thirds of the MPs on either side, could be reasonably assured they'd keep their seats, no matter what, for the rest of their lives.

Those figures we were just talking about there, those big, who were fighting those battles with Michael Foote, or whether it was, I mean Tony Blair, not a good example because he did lose his seat, but you know, all of these sorts of people, generally speaking, you could They were in seats, they had long parliamentary careers, they could get 30, 40 years in Parliament.And it led to a sense of a certain amount of stability.They weren't skittish about every crisis which came along.Look at the Labour MPs elected in 2024.Huge majority, but a shallow one, because so many of them had small, modest majorities.What is a safe seat these days for either Labour or Tory?

There isn't one.And I think that sense of panic, of MPs constantly fearing they're about to lose their seats, of new challenges, introduces churn and instability all of the time which makes it harder to manage parliamentary parties and Andy Burnham We'll struggle with that as well.It won't be as easy as it used to be even for him.

their own Instagram pages they've got their own they're their own brands and so they feel that they've got to be promoting themselves and they're not degradingon the party to promote them.And I think that that is another thing that has changed.But it leads to another good question from Anil Patel in London, and it follows on from just exactly what we've been talking about.I'd like to ask why Keir Starmer wanted to be prime minister in the first place, given he lacks any sense of purpose or mission?Why did he enter politics?

It's a really interesting question.and a really good question because of course he didn't enter, unusually for Prime Ministers these days, he didn't enter politics until pretty late in life, you know, he was in his 50s when he was first elected in 2015, having had obviously a very successful legal career.He said, in fact he said it himself, that Keir Starmer when he went into Parliament, Ed Miliband of course was instrumental in persuading Keir Starmer to stand for Parliament, basically sort of fixed a very safe seat in North London.And, you know, Starmer has said since that, you know, had Miliband won that election, people forget now a lot of people thought he would win that election, that he'd hoped and sort of anticipated he would be attorney general in that government, a position that clearly for all sorts of reasons would have suited him.Circumstances evolved over time.And I think that, you know, you had someone like Morgan McSweeney come along and I think Keir Starmer was the right man at the right time.

You know, sometimes the cards fall into place.and clearly he is a man and I think this is the thing that is always underestimated about him he is definitely a deeply deeply competitive person, and he has a deeply profound sense of self -belief, which can be a bit confusing because I think we look at him and see quite a mild -mannered man, a man who, you know, is not a sort of loud presence, you know, he doesn't fill every room when he walks into it.When we look at someone like Boris Johnson, that just sort of, like, epitomises kind of ambition and what we might think of narcissism and self -obsession and self -promotion.And we look at someone like Starmo and we don't think that, but it doesn't mean he doesn't have those characteristics.And I think that more than anything else.I think that he always reminds me a little bit of like a kind of Labour, a sort of more sort of a Tory politician in Labour clothes.

And what I mean by that is that A lot of Tories, particularly historically, were less ideologically driven in the sense that, you know, they just have a sense that, you know, the government's better run under the Tories than it is under Labour.Labour politicians are often expected to have a sort of slightly more developed kind of intellectual perspective.Certainly the Labour Party expects that of them.I think Starmer, in a way, is just a kind of instinctive social Democrat, hasn't thought a great deal about the sort of big ideas of politics, but has a sort of instinctive sense that things are better off with Labour.And, you know, the cards have fallen into place for him and you couple that with his ironclad self -belief and he is where he is.

And it's also there is an element of personality about Keir Starmer and I remember when you know he was running for the leadership I met a friend of mine who was a solicitor in criminal law who had instructed Starmer as the barrister to act in a number of cases.And I said, what's Keir Starmer like?And he said, oh, he's great.He's really great.I mean, we use him for our non -jury advocacy work.And I said, sorry, what does that mean?

Well, we wouldn't put him up before a jury to persuade a jury, but we ask him to do something for technical reasons about the law before a judge.And you think - A judge is lawyer.A judge is lawyer.So he can't do retail.And not being able to do retail when politics is a retail business is a really big handicap and I think his inability to kind of warm you know make the public attracted to him to warm up people to make people feel they're part of his project I think has been a huge handicap and again you know why if you're this very shy private slightly awkward man would you want to do this and I think Anil's question is an interesting one.one.

I'm fascinated by those sort of people because there are quite a lot of them who reach the top of politics.

I mean, Theresa May was another one, Gordon Brown to some extent as well.But again, I always think, and you always think like, I can see you'd be a great civil servant.You know, you're obviously very technocratically proficient and you're, you know, you're obviously a very capable person.But like, why, given that these things, the sort of retail element, as you say, John, makes you so uncomfortable, why put yourself in that position?And I always think, and I think May was exactly the same, I think we sort of think these people are shy.And I think very often they have an outer layer of shyness.

But it disguises a kind of really steely core.And as I say, sort of ironclad sense of self -belief.I think that was May. I think May had that.I mean, that story people used to tell, I think that Clegg used to tell about how, you know, May, you'd go into a meeting with her and there'd be no small talk.And you think it's because she's shy, but it's not because she's shy.It's actually because she's deeply self -confident and she doesn't have to feel that she has to nervously fill a silence, you know?

And I think there's an element of that about Starmer as well.And I think those sorts of personality types slightly confound us.in politics because we assume that there's a sort of shyness or whatever it is, but I don't think it is quite that, or if it is, it's quite a surface level shyness, as opposed to someone like Boris Johnson, who has a sort of exterior bluffness, but a kind of weird sort of inner shyness once you actually sort of talk to him for any sort of length of time.So people are complicated, right?And they don't They don't fit easy categorisation, but I am genuinely fascinated by the sort of outwardly introverted politician because you say, why are you putting yourself through it?Because it's sort of nightmarish.

It must be nightmarish for you, but they do it anyway.We'll be back in just a moment.Before we go and crawl off after a very long week, we've got a question.Final question from Abby Powers in York.Powers is a great name, isn't it?If she ever wants to be in politics, Powers is a great surname.

Sam Coates.may be a possible candidate to replace Andy Burnham as mayor of Manchester.Do you have any opinion on how suitable he would be for this position?And do you think this could signal a change in direction for politics in this country with more celebrities looking to stand for office?Well, I think political level, isn't he?

I mean, yeah, he's very political.And I think that, you know, he wouldn't be a Johnny come lately where it was just the badge being attached to him because the party thinks, oh, well, he's famous.Therefore, he'll do well.Gary Neville, I've seen around Labour Party conferences for the past few years.And recently, his podcast company, Overlap, is now part of the global empire.And I saw him the other day, and all he wanted to talk about was the politics of what was going on right now and what was happening in the government.

So he is deeply political.I think, in some ways, he might be very good.He's got an instant name recognition.He's great as a football player.Good mank boy, absolutely.And you know, and he has played football at the highest level.

There would be an attraction.

Yeah, look, I mean, we've talked about it so many times.The challenge, I'm going to be a bit unpleasant to exactly some of the sort of personality types we were just describing.I think in 21st century politics, particularly on the centre left, with stakes as high as they are, with the sort of personalities that we know they're going up against on the right, and let's be honest, sometimes the far right, there is no place for the wallflower or the minnows or the kind of, you know, like sort of shy types who are just worthy and technocratic and very, very kind of diligent.You need those people in politics, of course you do, and at a certain level, but at the top level,I'm afraid, I'm afraid it would be like running Gladstone in the 1950s during the television age.You know, like politics has moved on.

Politics has to fit itself around the technological media space in which we operate.And therefore you need candidates, and I think Neville will be a great example of this, who can bust through the attention economy, who have something to say.And that's important as well.You don't just want sort of idiots to put up there and, you know, just people with name recognition.But when you've got someone like Neville, who fits, ticks all the boxes of getting attention, but clearly is really political.And I hate the kind of snobbery around.

I mean, I don't follow footballers, you know, but I hate the snobbery around footballers where people like stick to football and all that kind of thing.Why on earth shouldn't they be getting involved in politics and have something to say about politics?Seems to me Neville would be an absolutely horrible perfect candidate if he wanted it in a race like that, where Labour would be really, you know, pushing water uphill to hold on to the mayoralty.

No, I think, Lewis, I think you're wrong.I think what we need are more candidates who've done PPE, who've then gone to work for a trade union for two years, who become a parliamentary researcher, and then they went to go and work for an aid agency.I mean, look, Politics is absolutely full of people with very conventional backgrounds, increasingly so, where they've never done anything other than politics.Or public advocacy, or those sorts of things.Exactly.My God, it would be a breath of fresh air to have somebody who is political, who does have political beliefs, who's been going to party conferences for years, but had another life.

He had a life as a professional footballer at the highest level, Manchester United and England.He has had a great career as a football analyst.He set up a podcast company.He's been a big investor in Manchester.You could see that he would be a very attractive candidate right now.He's got the news agents endorsement.

I think the absolute kiss of death.Oh, my God.Oh, well, that was it was nice while it lasted.Sorry, Gary.We'll see you next week.Bye bye.

Bye bye.

This has been a Global Player original production.

The News Agents podcast is brought to you by HSBC UK, opening up a world of opportunity.