Starmer in shambles: Can he last the week? | 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.

Obviously, the focus now is on what happens about defence spending.

We must be able to deter aggression.And yes, if necessary, we will.We must be ready to fight.

There is something, I think, really peculiar about the Keir Starmer friendship, John, and its end.And it's, I think, hard in some ways to get it across to people exactly why it is so many of his colleagues are so deeply pissed off.

Well, this is part of the problem.You know, we're fighting each other rather than getting behind the nation, unifying the nation around a common principle of purpose.And that purpose is to defend the nation, defend the freedoms that we enjoy, and ensure we've got the determination and courage to make those difficult decisions.

That is Al Kahnz, until yesterday afternoon, the Armed Forces Minister, a decorated military veteran himself, but pouring scorn on this government's attempts to find a solution to how to fund our defence budget.What does Keir Starmer do now?Welcome to the News Agents.

The News Agents.

It's John.It's Lewis.And one of the front pages I think sums up.Everything that happened yesterday, extremely well in just three years, in three words, Healy torpedoes Starmer.As you and Emily were saying on the show yesterday, John, I can't think of a more devastating resignation, actually, even some of the great famous ones, some of which you're talking about yesterday, like with Jeffrey Howe and Margaret Thatcher, for all sorts of reasons, the sort of politician that John Healy is, the subject which is involved, how weak Starmer's authority already is, the manner of his departure is priming the politics to come, especially with Makerfield next week.And he wasn't alone since you recorded yesterday.

as you've already said, Al Khans, the Defence, the Armed Forces Minister resigned later in the evening after an extraordinary interview.on Sky News where he made it clear and they made it clear that he hadn't even bothered as a sitting minister to check ahead or check in with Number 10 to get clearance to do the interview which of course is always necessary and usual for any ministerial interview.Again a sign of just how frayed to the point of almost non -existence this Prime Minister's writ and authority is over his own government.A few hours after he'd done that interview with Sky, he had resigned, telling Keir Starmer that the government's defense investment plan, the DIP, was neither transformative enough nor sufficiently funded, which of course echoes exactly what John Healey had said in that extraordinary resignation letter.Healey's PPS, Pamela Nash, the sort of lowest rung on the ministerial ladder, also resigned last night as his parliamentary assistant.And what I also found very striking, John, beyond the resignations and the more narrow matter of defence as important as it is, what I found so striking were the number of Labour MPs who took to X and sent posts not in defence of the Prime Minister, not suggesting or saying, you know, or indicating that somehow that John Healey might have been misguided or had been wrong to resign, but the number of Labour MPs, including sitting ministers, talking about their admiration for Healey, saying how principled and honourable they thought that he had been, and almost not a word of support whatsoever for either Keir Starmer or Rachel Reeves' position.

I think going into yesterday, the path for Keir Starmer to remain as Prime Minister in the wake of a Andy Burnham victory in Makefield was slim and slender.After what we saw yesterday, it feels to me as if it is almost now non -existent.

Yeah, it's so interesting, isn't it?Because it's hard to see the resignation of a minister provoke such an outpouring of support from all sides.Since when do we have any unifying politicians in this country?And yet somehow, John Healey rises and rose above the political fray as someone who was doing a tough job in difficult circumstances, but who had the interests of the nation at heart.And I think what made it even more powerful was the fact that we knew no one's talking about John Healey as a potential leadership contender.It was because he didn't have that sort of sense of ambition and drive for himself.

that I think makes it all the more powerful, all the more toxic for Keir Starmer.The only thing I would say, and it was funny, someone sent me, who works in the defence industries, from the trade body a message, the statement that the chief executive of this trade body put out last night.And he says, you know, over the years, I've known him, he's consistently shown himself to be an intelligent, supportive and highly principled man who has the best interests of UK defence as top of mind in everything that he does.And then it goes on.His resignation today is something to lament and truly a damning reflection on the current state of affairs.You'd normally think a trade body would say, well, I'd like to thank John Healey for all the work he's done, and we look forward to working with the new secretary of state.

And I think that may be in some people's minds they are was he too close was he too close to the defense industries who would profit from the contracts that would be given out if John Healey had won that extra money I don't know it's a small thingI just thought actually I wonder how helpful that is to John Healey.But the broader point that you're making about this was someone who was trying to fight the good fight within government is absolutely true and what makes it doubly so is that Keir Starmer has made it clear that is the fight above all else that needs to be won.This is Keir Starmer when he was speaking at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year.

The road ahead is straight and it is clear.We must build our hard power because that is the currency of the age.We must be able to deter aggression.And yes, if necessary, we must be ready to fight, to do whatever it takes to protect our people, our values, and our way of life and as Europe we must stand on our own two feet.Now that means being bolder, it means putting away petty politics and short -term concerns, it means acting together to build a stronger Europe and a more European NATO.

Yeah, put away the petty concerns, we've got to work together, you know, and yet within his own government that he leads, the first Lord of the Treasury, couldn't get this spending for the defence investment plan over the line?

Look, I think that there is.Let's be a bit sceptical here about the Ministry of Defence for a second.Just before I say that, I should say, I mean, I got to know John Healey a little bit during the Afghanistan Data Leak story.I mean, I found him very, very straight.I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that this is what he thinks.None of it is political.

He really believes that we need this money.And it's absolutely true to say as well that there is a wider context in all of this.European defence spending in many places in many countries is galloping ahead.It is clear that our own capabilities are not adequate in all sorts of ways.We've seen that play out over the Iran crisis.If you look at the extraordinary extra defense spending that we're seeing in places like Poland, now four and a half percent of GDP, Germany, and so on, we are quickly declining down the league tables in terms of military spending within NATO as a proportion of our GDP.

I think if the Prime Minister and the Chancellor were sat here, I think they would have a case, which is this.They would say, look, we did the defense, the strategic defense review.We did that with the Ministry of Defence.We found the money for that.We pledged the extra money that the Ministry of Defence said that they would require.And now they're coming back when it isn't clear that that much materially has changed and asking for money over and above that.

Now, the international trade scene has changed to some extent.So I'm sure the Ministry of Defence could say that.Secondly, I think it is true to say that within the Treasury there is, I think rightly, huge scepticism about the Ministry of Defence and their competence, frankly, in actually buying and procuring and designing new kits, new material, new armaments.There is a feeling that it is basically a bottomless pit, a bit like the NHS, but with the key difference with the NHS that when you have the NHS and other bits of the public sector, the right wing press are watching it like a hawk.laser -like focus, looking for largesse, looking for examples of spending gone awry, trying to find examples of proof positive, if you like, of their theory that basically the public sector can't spend money well.The one exception to that in the public sector is defence, where those same people who are so sceptical

of profligacy in the public sector don't apply that same scrutiny to Ministry of Defence and basically say whatever the army chiefs want, the army chiefs have got to get.So I do understand that scepticism and I do understand that fight within the government.But I think there are two big problems with that.One, you've already said, John, which is that it is Keir Starmer himself who has set his stall and attached his colours to the idea of security, improving the apparatus of our security and boasted and gone to all of these conferences, pledging and suggesting and saying that Britain will be absolutely central in the fight against Russia and against our wider enemies.You can't attach and give so much of your own diplomatic credibility.You can't say all of those things if you're not then willing to back it up with a hard real cash.

Because the Ministry of Defence know then they've got you over the barrel.And the second thing I think in terms of why it doesn't really wash either is simply because, as I say, you've seen the international situation change.He himself has gone to Trump and the American administration and said we will spend this money and we will spend more money and sooner or later with stama you know these words are going to come back to haunt you his entire legacy if you like his entire promise or premise of his premiership has been based around foreign affairs, security, and so on.And that is why all of this is particularly damaging for what remained of his authority.And I have to say, I thought that as a piece of political incompetence, and we've seen quite a lot of that from number 10 over the last few months, as a piece of political mismanagement, losing Healy in the first place, devastating, I think, you know, almost to the point where you almost got to do whatever it takes to retain him because you know how damaging it would be.But in the event of them losing it, don't brief out, don't brief out as the Treasury did last year.

that basically what John Healey is saying is that he wants less money to be spent on schools and hospitals because that's not true.That is going to piss off not only Healey and his allies but anybody within the Parliamentary Labour Party who can see that that is not the only answer.Government is about choices, it's about political choices.It is not the case that you have to spend intrinsically less money on schools and hospitals if you're going to increase money on defence.It is true to say that we are in a period of straightened resources and there are hard choices to be made, but you and I have talked about this before, occasionally get stick for it, ultimately in the next four years we are planning to be spending an extra 20 % billion pounds on sickness and disability related benefits.And that is a political choice.

I'm not talking about changing it from where it is now.That's just the net increase from where we are today by 2030.And 20 billion pounds, whether it's on schools or hospitals or defence, arguably would be far better spent than on simply seeing a welfare budget which balloons and balloons and balloons.

I mean, I'm struck, Lewis, by you last Friday were sitting where I am now, talking to Wes Streeting.And West Streeting, you know, we played out the clip from your interview where West Streeting is almost predicting this and says, this is the exemplar of Keir Starmer's lack of political craft skill to be able to get something done and a decision made and rally the support needed.If you are the prime minister and you are saying and you're standing up at you know, the Munich Security Conference, making this pledge that this is the kind of be all and end all of what this government is about and keeping the nation safe.And the circumstances have changed.And therefore, we've got to put aside petty differences and just take the tough decisions that are necessary.And then you're incapable of delivering on that.

That is really quite striking.I'm wondering, you know, we don't know what Dan issaid when he got offered the job and kind of, I'd said on the podcast yesterday, I thought it would be Dan Jarvis.So I was mighty relieved when it turned out that it was him who's become the new defence secretary.Cassandra Sopal strikes again.Yeah, I know.

Exactly.Cassandra.It must be hard to have this level of foresight.You should just see my crystal balls.Honestly, they're quite amazing.Not again.

Thanks.I think that, does Dan Jarvis go into those conversations and those chats and say, OK, you want me to be defence secretary?Right.Here's the price tag.And I wonder whether he tries to get some more money for the defence investment plan.you know, because he's in a very powerful position, when Keir Starmer is in a right old bloody mess.

This is why this is so, so toxic, I think, not just because I mean, you can make an argument to say, let's say that we accept what he's saying is right.If what he is saying is right, then basically what this government is doing, and this is why it's so politically devastating, is basically leaving Britain exposed to the possibility of foreign attack and is not doing enough to keep us safe, which given that is the first duty of any government, it's hard to find how it could be or imagine how it could be more devastating.But even if we just leave the substance of it to one side, let's say that Dan Jarvis, let's say Kiir Starmer would like, is now minded to actually give the Ministry of Defence what it wants or some of what it wants.One of the reasons I think he's got into this mess in the first place is precisely because his political authority has been so limited and lessened by so much of what has happened.It's clear that he didn't have the authority, if he was so minded, to actually get out of the treasury what he thinks would be necessary.He then goes to the rest of the cabinet and says, right, I want 1 % of your capital budgets in order to fund extra spending for the Ministry of Defence.

Spending, by the way, that Healey says, is not sufficient.but even that 1 % across the different departments.And basically, those departments seem to have basically sort of said, or at least are in no mood or in no hurry to actually do what the Prime Minister wants and carry out the Prime Minister's will.And if that was the case before this resignation, then my word, what would the case be now?I think the truth is, is there's a feeling, I've been speaking to a few people, you know, senior people in Whitehall, officials and whatever, There is a feeling right now that when we're thinking about the Prime Minister's authority, the authority of the centre, which is so crucial in our system, the one thing that really cannot unlock things in Whitehall is if the Prime Minister wants it, the Prime Minister says, the Prime Minister wants and needs this to happen, that right now, where that authority should be, there is a complete vacuum.Someone said to me, it is as if there is no centre right now, because we are all in this remarkable position where we're waiting to see what happens in Makerfield.

And it's been reported today that the Prime Minister even now is convinced that he can and should fight on in the event of a Burnham victory.Maybe we can talk about that a bit later.But even leaving Makerfield to one side, the Prime Minister's own authority over the machine seems so limited right now that government, in the sense of getting anything done beyond the wheels just turning in the way that they normally would and should, just isn't happening.

Well, lots were drawn yesterday in Downing Street about who would get the short straw to have to go out and defend the government over what has happened, to be the one who goes on the radio and says, no, no, no.Everything is just absolutely hunky -dory.It fell to Peter Kyle, the science minister.

We have consistently delivered on defence.We got to the 2 .6 % or 2 .5 % target years ahead of target, our promises, our manifesto commitment.And we have got to 2 .6 % now and we are chargingahead.This is a really difficult moment because we are in such a...You're charging ahead, Mr Kyle.

No, we are charging ahead with the purpose.

From 2 .6 to 2 .68, so that's 0 .08%.

That's charging ahead.Nick, we will get to 3 % by the early period of the next Parliament and by 3 to 3 .5 % by 2035.

But it's not enough, Mr Kyle.It's not enough for your former colleagues Secretary of State for Defence, it's not enough for the Arms Forces Minister, it's not enough for Lord Robertson, who was a Defence Secretary under Labour and Secretary General of NATO, and it's not enough for a squadron of former military men and women.How can we, a straight face, tell us that you're getting to where you need to be?

I can tell you, Nick, with a completely straight face, that when we went into the last election pledging to get to 2 .5 % by the end of this Parliament, everybody agreed that that was an ambitious target.

Yeah, it's so interesting, John, hearing Bita Kyle there talking about, you know, two and a half percent, three percent.Again, I do think one of the consequences of what we saw yesterday, I think there are two big consequences, really.One is, I think it will be even actually harder to have a sensible conversation about defence.And there is, I mean, look, I've said on the show many times before, I think, you know, we should have been spending more on defence for a long time.I am struck by, it does seem that a lot of the commentary on this, it's almost as if we got to year zero when Labour was elected, as if, as if they are wholly responsible for how inadequate and incapable our military seems to be and our capabilities seem to be at the moment.In fact, as we know, these things have incredibly long run -in times and, you know, the Conservatives, I think, actually have got away with a huge amount in terms of their own record on defence and the MOD.

But leaving that to one side, you know, We had a long debate for a long time, which again, the right always wanted to have, which was to say, you know, when we were talking about point seven percent of GDP on international aid, they would often say, well, why are we thinking about it in terms of percentage?of GDP?Yes, that's an international target.But shouldn't we be thinking about what we need, about the capabilities that we ought to have?And I do think that that is true and ought to be true on defence as well.It could be that we need to spend more than three percent of GDP on defence.

But, you know, the actual two and a half, three percent or whatever it is.Fundamentally, these are pretty arbitrary targets, especially arbitrary of late, because they've basically been set to try and please Donald Trump.So, you know, I think that was unfortunate.I do think the net result of his resignation yesterday will be to make that conversation even harder to have, a sensible conversation, even harder to have.And also, let's leave Starmer up to one side for a second.This is going to make life difficult for Andy Burnham, because Andy Burnham, if he's going to come in and he's elected on Thursday and then becomes prime minister, what does he think about defence?

What does he think about that extra military spending?He's been hinting at lots of different extra spending pledges, including to, among other people, the WASP women over the course of the next week, last week.Pretty expensive stuff.I think what the Healey resignation has done and will do is propel the question of defence spending even higher on the agenda and limit the room of manoeuvre for Starmer, for sure, but also for anybody who might replace Starmer, principally Burnham, in what was already a really, really tight set of public spending limitations.And that's what makes me think even more and more that in some form, quite significant tax rises are probably coming.

Well, let's consider those questions about how Starmer does respond to all this, particularly next week when Bakerfield is taking place.We'll be back in just a moment.I ran into someone who was a mate of Keir Starmer's who was left reeling, to be honest, about what had happened with the resignation of John Healey and he sort of sketched out a plan of what was intended to happen on the assumption that next week Andy Burnham won the Makefield by -election.It went something like this, that Andy Burnham would be embraced warmly by Keir Starmer, be told, you've just shown us how we can win in Makefield, now we've got to win the mayoralty in Manchester again, and once you've done that, come back into the Cabinet and become Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, and you can deal with some of those issues about the people who've been left behind that you have been talking about in your very effective mayoralty of Greater Manchester, then you will have plenty of time to prepare yourself for a challenge.Not immediately, there'll be a time, I won't be fighting the next election, but I will make space for that to happen before the next election, but it will suit you and And it will suit me and it will suit the Labour Party if there is an orderly handover of power and we just don't need to run at it too fast.Because let's face it, Andy, you're not ready to take over and I'm not ready to go.

I think the plan, if that genuinely is what it was, and it sort of makes a certain amount of sense, has been sort of slightly blown apart by the Healey resignation.And I think that they are left thinking, well, what on earth do we do now?

Yeah.Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs.Here's your ticket to Vladivostok, Mr. Burnham.Would you enjoy?Perhaps you'd enjoy spending three or four weeks on the Trans -Siberian Express.No, of course.

I mean, I'm sure I can totally see the appeal to Starmer, even to Burnham potentially of that plan.But you're right, as we were saying at the start, it feels to me that the space for that sort of rapprochement or the space for Starmer to potentially want to stay on and fightbecome almost impossible to see.That said, I mean, Patrick McGuire's got a good piece in the Times today about this.You know, Starmer, as we know, is a stubborn guy and he backs himself.You know, any successful prime minister should.

And he has, in fairness to him, often been underestimated.In fairness to him, he's often beaten the odds before.So I can imagine in Keir Starmer's story, in his own head, this is the latest kind of iteration of that.I think if Barnum wins on Thursday and people up there are increasingly bullish, at least privately, that that is going to happen.I think that, and Starmer then obviously, as you say, has a decision, and Burnham has a decision as well, which is how and when to challenge.I'm sure he'd much prefer not to have to do it in the first place.

And he'd much prefer if Starmer were to fall on his sword and recognise the game was up.I think the circumstances in which that might happen is this.It is clear that there are plenty of other people on the front bench in the ministerial ranks who are willing to resign.It is clear from the reaction to Healey yesterday that discipline within the government itself has all but broken down.And as we've been saying, the ability of number 10 to have its way over the Whitehall machine and increasingly even over the Labour machine is vanishing very quickly.And I think if it became clear, and I am told and I'm sure that this is the case, that there would be multiple members of the cabinet who would resign in the unless Starmer sets out a timetable in short order.

And that could be, you know, it doesn't have to be an immediate timetable.It could be, you know, getting through to September, October, do one last party conference.We'll see one of those sort of endless sort of Bette Midler type sort of forever farewell tours, you know, and kind of trying to generate the legacy.And we'll say, Keir, you know, if you do this, then it will open the space for you.to maybe to get a few last things through the actual government machine and through the Labour Party.There'll be gratitude to you.

This is the way that you construct a legacy.One of the ironies, though, of course, of that of that idea is that initially, at least as part of that plan, one of the planks and pillars of that legacy was supposed to be the defence investment plan.and supposed to be getting that off the books, which actually, funnily enough, I'm sure Andy Burnham would have quite liked, because, you know, that's quite a knotty, thorny issue, spending commitments that Burnham would rather not have to think about.But as we've just been saying, unless Dahmer can suddenly sort of turn it around, seems unlikely now in terms of actually resolving it, it's just going to be one of those other big, big sort of political issues that he's going to have to try and resolve.

Yeah, I've heard something very similar.I mean, I think what you've just highlighted, Lewis, is how little we know about what Andy Burnham thinks about myriad issues.You know, obviously, the focus now is on what happens about defence spending and the defence investment plan.And does he support John Healey or does he stand with Keir Starmer?You know, we just have no idea where Andy Burnham and rightly so.He hasn't wanted to talk about things like that when he's fighting a by -election and he's talking, asking for the people in Makefield to vote for him on local issues.

So fair enough.But I think it shows that there is a huge gap where we just have no idea.what it is that Andy Burnham thinks about, a whole range of detailed issues where decisions will have to be made on spending, on tax, on savings, whatever it happens to be.I think the plan that you sketch out, I've heard something very, very similar.Look, you know, Keir Starmer, you've got two choices.You can have a legacy as the man who took us from the depths of despair and Jeremy Corbyn, that in a record time, you turn this party around, you win a record you know, general election.

you then do some important changes to Britain's defence investment plan, which was meant to be part of that of course, and you go in a way that is dignified, that the Labour Party doesn't tear itself apart, or you go as a leader who ran us into the ground, who leads to a squabbling, bad -tempered election contest where no one wins and the party's reputation lies in tatters at the end of it.And I can see how you frame that argument and I can see the mechanism, and I think you're right to talk about the lack of discipline on the front bench now, and the lack of loyalty.I was told last night that apparently Keir Starmer was really hurt and taken aback by Ed Miliband sort of, you know, suggesting that it was time that Keir Starmer thought about laying out a timetable in the wake of the local council elections.And I think that speaks to how unpolitical Keir Starmer is, that he thinks, well, But Ed Miliband's my friend.How could he possibly do that?And so I think that there is every possibility that there is stubbornness.

I still think the most likely scenario is what happened with Margaret Thatcher.when at the end of her time in office when you know there'd been the leadership contest she'd failed to win outright by two votes and bit by bit the cabinet kind of say to her even though she says i fight i fight to win members of the cabinet one by one go in to see her and say i'm sorry margaret i say it with a heavy heart but it's over and i think if the cabinet go in and say to stammer it's over This doesn't go on and it can't go on.And if you try to make it go on even further without setting out a timetable, we'll go nuclear.I think he has to listen, doesn't he?

Yeah, there is something I think really peculiar about the Keir Starmer premiership, John.and its end.And it's quite, I think, hard in some ways to get it across to people exactly why it is so many of his colleagues are so deeply pissed off.You know, a lot of people, I know you get this, I get this all the time.People think, what's the problem?OK, he's not the most exciting guy in the world, but, you know, he seems pretty competent.

He seems pretty, you know, reasonable.He seems like a nice enough guy, all that sort of thing.And all that may well, in many cases, is true.I think, though, the Healy, this whole episode, once again, sort of drums home, adverts to exactly the nature of the problem, which is effectively, and this is what you hear from minister after minister after minister sort of tearing their hair out and has been from in their view from the very beginning of the government a kind of basic lack of political competence of political abilities of of of of seeing situations coming and neutralizing and dealing with them before they do and of course mistakes are always going to be made and it's never going to be perfect but in this case now the kind of sort of category of error, the kind of like sequencing of just sort of needless, needless sort of mistake after mistake with the defence investment plan, not being able to see it off, not being able to keep Healey within the tent.It reminds, it reminds, and then the stupid briefing afterwards, it reminds all those Labour MPs, who I know some of them were thinking, they were looking at Burnham during this by -election campaign and going, maybe the king over the water, maybe that crown doesn't fit quite as comfortably on his head as we thought it would, you know, it's not easy for him either.He's made a few mistakes in interviews.

It's not very clear what he thinks about things.All of these old apprehensions about Burnham as a principal political player just re -emerging and maybe just thinking, well, maybe there should at the very least be a contest.And, you know, maybe if Keir can sort of, you know, remind us.kind of, you know, that he is an effective prime minister and so on, maybe there was a little bit of space.And there has been polling even showing that Starmer is still more popular with Labour members than you might think.And then this happens.

And it reaffirms, just reanimates, sort of exercises exactly kind of why it is that so many Labour MPs privately and ministers privately sit and talk to you and are in a state of almost constant despair.The sense of repeated and sustained self -inflicted wounds, of which this is one of the biggest that we've seen.And I think that's why the last 24 hours fundamentally have been so damaging if not lethal for any prospect even if it was small of a Keir Starmer reanimation.

And this is why you know some of the stuff I've heard of the sort of the power brokers of the soft left in the Labour Party who in terms of policy were getting an awful lot of what they wanted from Keir Starmer.I mean, Keir Starmer is no Blairite in the policies.

It's not even that political.That's kind of what I mean about it being weird.The divisions aren't that really much about policy.There isn't that much between Andy Burnham and Keir Starmer.There's not that much between Ed Miliband and Keir Starmer.There's more between Tony Blair and Keir Starmer.

But, you know, he's a long way away from the Labour Party in all sorts of ways these days.It's not really policy.It's more functional than that.

It's competence.It's the ability to deliver on the job.And I think that people are going to Andy Burnham, not because they think he is the second coming and the messiah.They think that it can't go on as it is with Keir Starmer as prime minister.And for all the thoughts and, you know, a lot of the people that are sort of quietly backing Andy Burnham now are people who've known him for a very long time and aware of political shortcomings and may not think he is.the most kind of, you know, he's not the complete politician, the brilliant genius of policy and strategy.

But they're turning to Andy Burnham because they just think it is absolutely desperate right now and that unless they do something the Labour Party is going to run into the ground at the next general election and the greatest fear of all that Nigel Farage succeeds him.

It's going to be quite a big week, isn't it?I've got this feeling again.I'm getting my own crystal balls out, John.And I've just got this feeling that it actually might be quite a big political week.I could be wrong.Those crystal balls are nothing compared to yours, so I'll defer to you.

You've got such insight.We'll be back in just a moment.So we were just talking about Nigel Farage before the break.And he has sat down and done a really unusual, interesting interview with our own Nick Ferrari here at LBC.And it's really interesting, this question that Nick asks about Farage's future.Have a listen.

Do you want to be prime minister?

Do you know something, Nick?Not for the sake of the office or the title, because I couldn't give a damn about that.Never been interested in that.For me, politics is not about what I become in terms of a personal status, it's about what I can do.Right now, I believe I'm the only person that's got sufficient public rapport and the courage to take on the establishment and do what needs to be done.Right now, I'm the right person.

May well be in a couple of years' time or more, somebody else comes along who's better equipped.Right now, I do believe it's me.

Well, I mean, our listeners are extremely intelligent, so they won't need me to point out that a couple of years time could easily be before the next election.And I'm really intrigued by that answer.And I'm sure reform will sort of brief out, no, you know, the media are misinterpreting it or overthinking.He's just saying, you know, he's always been about doing something rather than being something.And, you know, that's, in fairness to him, that's true, because if he wants to be something, he would have stayed in the Tory party.You know, he wouldn't have started his own party and so on.

But I think I've said on the show for a while now, I think, and I'll definitely repeat it now.I genuinely think that it is one of the most underpriced prospects in politics that Farage does not fight the next election.as reform leader.And I say that because I've said that because knowing him slightly, I think that he is somewhat, you know, if we had a presidential system, he would love that and he would go for it.He hates and always has done the management of a parliamentary grouping, going back to the European days when he was in the European Parliament.By the time he got to the end of the Parliament, half of them had left.

We know, go and ask Robert Kilroy -Silk, we know that he has this long history of combustible relationships.Look what's happened with Rupert Lowe in very, very recent history.He finds it impossible to manage a team.or to be a boss of a team.I think not bad boss necessarily to people who work directly for him, but in terms of a bit like that thing that people used to say about Margaret Thatcher, that she was good to work for and terrible to work with.And I think there's a real touch of Farage about that.

And frankly, as well.This is a man who I think loves the cut and thrust of politics itself, of campaigning, for which even if you despise him, you have to credit.He is one of the most effective political campaigners of our political era.He has moved British politics repeatedly and in a sustained way to look and sound more like him and has done so over decades.But the hard graftof governing, of being the one that the grenades are being thrown at, rather than the guy who is throwing them, I've never been sure that that's Farage.

Not least when I know for a fact that Even when he was thinking about re -entering politics, that was a true 51 -49 % decision for him because he was enjoying his life a great deal on the MAGA circuit, very lucrative, enjoying his life as a sort of media quasi -political figure, doing all the things and saying whatever he wants to say.And as we know, politics is difficult and hard.And there's still, if there's an election next year, maybe, but we're still maybe three years away.That's a long, long time.So an intriguing answer, I think.

Yeah, Lewis, I mean, you and I have both got to know Farage a bit over the years and have both noticed that brilliant campaigner, as you rightly say, and also very good at being man of the people and wading into a crowd and taking on all comers and kind of, you know, seems to be pretty hell fellow well met until you realize that actually he can be very thin skinned as well at times.And I wonder whether some of the stuff that has happened As reform has got bigger and more popular, so the scrutiny has increased and this £5m you know, donation, present, gift from someone he barely knows from, you know, he's a businessman based in Thailand.I think that really is tricky for him.And I think he really resents the idea that he's going to be facing that kind of scrutiny and kind of examination for the next two, three years.So I'm sure reform, as you say, will say, you people at the newsagents, you're just reading far too much into this.You know, wind your necks in.

But I think there's something there.

Also, he will know as an astute reader of politics, better than most, unfortunately, depending on your own politics.you know, yeah, they had some great local election results, and they really brilliantly in Scotland, and they, you know, this is easily the most successful political outfit of the many that Farage has run, with a moment potentially politically primed for it.But yeah, he'll be looking at the polls, and he can see that, you know, I think there was a poll this week, just gone, they were, I think, 25 points, you know, Labour and Tory on 19, 20, you know, it doesn't take much.It really doesn't take much in a system that's fragmented.Right now, first past the post, we saw this in the local elections, is working really well for them on 25 % of the vote.Hasn't worked for most of Farage's career, but right now, if you're on 25 and everyone else is on 20, doesn't matter that it's an historically low proportion of the vote for the biggest party, because you just win and win and win.

But it doesn't have to change very much.And it could change a hell of a lot in the next three years.And Farage likes to win.He likes to win and he likes to be known as a winner, much like his lodestar and hero, Donald Trump.And if he gets a sense that suddenly it's going to be much harder to win and he might become a loser or become known as someone who's throwing it away again, I think the scales tip for him potentially.And so I think what that comment, I think what that comment reveals is actually a deep ambivalence within his psychology.

all along and maybe even a bit of worry about his own and his party's own political, future political prospects.Because for a party which is so much based on vibes, which itself is now getting reformed, outreformed, you know, literally Rupert Lowe pulling off the same trick against him that he's pulled off the Tories for so many years, which will be very irritating to him.I think it is revealing of a man who's in two minds about his own future.

We will be back on Monday when a soothsayer good all warns us it could be quite a political week.We'll see you then.Bye bye.

Can't wait.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.