Labour risks losing voters on both sides of the political spectrum by focusing too much on the Red Wall and Reform UK.
Voters feel taken for granted and may seek alternatives.
Transcript:
Rory Stewart
Welcome to the Rest is Politics Question Time with me, Rory Stewart.
Speaker 5
And me, Alistair Campbell. And on the main podcast, Rory, you said you wanted to start off with the UK. So what do you want to start off with? Well, I want to start with a question from Marissa, who's one of our members.
Rory Stewart
Thank you to everyone who's subscribing and a member of TRIP. And she's asked, is Labour so focused on the red wall and reform for internationalists, Nigel Farage's right-wing party, that they risk losing people at the other end of the spectrum. I've always voted Labour, but the boasting that the aid cut was part of a political strategy was the last straw. I feel they're taking people like me for granted. I have alternatives. Over to you, Alistair. Why do you say over to me like that, Rory? Did you see I sent you some polling?
Speaker 5
Yeah. Done by More In Common in conjunction with the University College of London. Really, really interesting polling. And we can share it again for members on our newsletter.
Rory Stewart
But what it's showing is that Labour has been hemorrhaging votes to both the left and the right. And so Marissa is absolutely right that we now have a world in which basically there are four equally sized blocks in British politics with about 25% of the vote each. It's sort of Greens and Lib Dems, Labour, Conservatives and Reform. Over to you, Anastasia, on this question of Marissa's sense that they're losing votes on the left. And then I might talk a little bit about why they're also losing votes on the right.
Alastair Campbell
There's no doubt the aid decision, you and I talked about it, and we didn't hide our views. We were very, very disappointed. I was a fundraiser last night for a friend of mine, Laura Kirk-Smith, who's a Labour MP in Aylesbury, a seat that, you know, frankly, Labour very rarely won. And there were people there, there were Labour supporters, they were still turning up because it was a fundraiser, she was a friend of theirs, etc. But quite a few of them saying this was really, one of them actually used the same words as Marissa, that it was sort of last straw time. Now, I think that there is a danger that they get so hung up on this idea, this monolithic view of what a Red Wall voter is, that they do underestimate people who feel taken for granted. And we talked yesterday about Australia and about Canada, and there is less tribalism in politics. There are fewer people who will say, I always, always, always vote the same way. One of the things that's really interesting in this polling, the number of people who always vote the same way is falling. What did you think was the main thing out of the polling room? One thing I was really encouraged by, which again speaks to Marissa's point, is that the very large proportion of people who say they would vote tactically to stop reform. In other words, Labour will get votes back, but I don't think they'll get those votes back if people think, well, they're trying to hate reform. I think they'll get them back if they think they're giving something very, very different. (Time 0:02:17)
Public Perception of Political Inertia
The public believes poor leadership is the primary reason for slow political progress, not systemic issues.
They think good leadership could overcome funding and regulatory hurdles.
Transcript:
Alastair Campbell
Stuff out? I think they would say that it was about the quality of the politicians and it was about our political system.
Rory Stewart
What's interesting about it is that you're absolutely right in one but less right in the other. You're absolutely right that the number one thing that people say is responsible is poor leadership. In other words, they believe that if you had good leadership, you'd be able to sort these problems out. But they don't blame the system, really. So actually, only 16% think the problem are the rules and regulations and the structural things.
Alastair Campbell
16% lack of funding.
Rory Stewart
And 16% lack of funding, which is really interesting, because obviously you and I, and sort of more geeky social scientists, will tend to look at, well, structures, funding, make it All very difficult. That's not the way the public think about it at all. The public overwhelmingly thinks, actually, if these guys really wanted to get on with it, there is enough money. The rules and regulations will let them do it and they should just push ahead. And the reason they're not doing it is they're poor leaders and they're pretty inefficient. (Time 0:07:10)
Strategic Approach to PMQs
Focus Prime Minister's Questions on key vulnerabilities of the Prime Minister.
Connect these vulnerabilities to your party's proposed solutions and policy differences.
Transcript:
Rory Stewart
My view. What would be, this is a very cheeky question for you, because obviously you're on the Labour side of this, but what would be your advice to Kemi Baden-Ock on how to do Prime Minister's Questions. What's she doing less well and what should she be trying to improve?
Alastair Campbell
There is definitely an issue about her going in there with set questions and not being very quick on her feet. Two or three times now she has asked a question, Keir has essentially answered the question and then Kemmy Baden-Ock has come back and said you didn't answer the question. You've got to be quick on your feet. I think sometimes this goes back to what we talked to France Timmermans about on leading. I was amazed about how closely he followed our politics, but he basically said, why does that new leader of the Conservative Party keep doing all this cultural stuff? Nobody cares when the world is in the mess that it's in. So I think she would be much better to be using Prime Minister's questions for bigger strategic points. I always felt with Prime Minister's questions when we were in opposition, I always used to say Prime Minister's questions was a strategic anvil.
Speaker 5
We were hammering out our strategy against the Conservative government strategy. Okay, so there's a question from John. What is a better way to prepare for Prime Minister's questions?
Rory Stewart
So run through how you would think about preparing for the crisis. You've set it out, strategic anvil, which, what does that mean exactly? That means that this is where you land the story of the week?
Alastair Campbell
It might be, but no, it's very different if you're in government or in opposition, but are you talking about from opposition? From opposition, I guess, yeah. From opposition, I think you work out what is the issue on which the prime minister is going to feel most vulnerable. And you've probably got a choice of two or three of those. Allied to that, what in the exchanges we're going to have, will I be able to say about what we have been trying to do or differences that we will make? But I've noticed once or twice, she's gone on stuff that I think just don't, you can't sustain six questions on it. I, by the way, the other thing I would do if I were here, I would go three and three or two and four. I wouldn't always feel you have to do the same thing for six questions. We used to prepare a lot in opposition and it sounds strange, but sometimes it felt harder in opposition than it did in government. Because in government, do have much more that you are able to say, and you get into a rhythm. And I do think Keir Starmer's getting into pretty good rhythm at primalist questions. I think he's much better than when it started. I think she needs to be more serious about the issues, a little bit more variety, probably worry less about the news, I think. I think she's sort of trying too hard to land the clip that gets on the news. (Time 0:11:31)
Documentary Controversy
A BBC documentary, "Gaza: How to Survive a War," sparked controversy when a presenter's Hamas connection surfaced.
This fueled existing accusations of BBC bias towards Palestine.
Transcript:
Alastair Campbell
I just think that thinking is kind of very yesterday. Very good. Okay. We haven't talked about the Middle East for a while. Tim, who's a member, thank you, Tim. What do you make of the fuss being made over the documentary Gaza, How to Survive a War? When I watched it, all I saw was a fascinating film showing the stark reality of war made by brave, talented children, both behind and in front of the camera. There was no hint of sympathy for Hamas, nor that they had any influence on the documentary. If you follow this, Rory, this big row about a BBC documentary made by an independent, and it turned out that one of the children presenting it was the child of somebody quite senior in
Speaker 5
Hamas. Which ties into a continuing fight that's been happening, accusing the BBC of being too pro-Palestinian and being anti-Semitic, which is raised again and again.
Alastair Campbell
Just before we go to the substance, Rory, I must give a plug to Norma Percy's, this is also on the BBC, Norma Percy, you will know, veteran documentary maker, one of the most extraordinary Women. I don't know her age, but may I say I think she's been around for quite a long time. But she makes these amazing documentaries where she just speaks to the people who were essentially in the room. And this one's called Israel and the Palestinians, the road to October 7. And it's brilliant. It really is brilliant. The thing that struck me about it, it goes right back. So, you know, it goes back several decades in terms of the history. It takes you, there's lots of them of the modern day. You talk lots of interviews, including with some of the Hamas guys who've since been killed since doing the interview, not because I'm doing the interview, by the way, but they've been Killed. But the thing that you really see, one bit that really leapt out at me was Netanyahu under attack for agreeing to release Palestinian prisoners. This was in exchange for a soldier who'd been taken hostage and lots of, including somebody we interviewed on leading, Ehud Olmert. And also Uzi Arad, your friend from Mossad was on it as well. But basically that batch of prisoners that were released, they tracked. Most of them ended up planning and organizing October the 7th. So it's like you can make a decision that you can explain in that moment. But then once you put the sort of microscopic historical lens on it, you can go, ooh, I can see a thread there. So it's a very, very interesting, it's not biased, it's straightforward, it's all just voices of people who are in the room.
Speaker 5
Amazing interviews. On documentaries, before we just come back to the Middle East for final section, a huge recommendation, given the BBC gets beaten up all the time.
Rory Stewart
There's a really, really good documentary on Zelensky called The Zelensky Story.
Alastair Campbell
So what about the substance of this, Rory? The substance, yes. So (Time 0:14:07)
Trump's Gaza Plan and West Bank Conflict
Trump's proposal to displace Gaza's population emboldens Israeli extremists.
This undermines the two-state solution and fuels conflict in the West Bank.
Transcript:
Rory Stewart
Judy, who's a member from Hove, why do the analyses you provide in the Middle East often refer to the current crisis as starting on October 7th and omit the ongoing atrocities in the West Bank? Well, look, we've done a lot of explainers going back in history and getting into the story of the creation state of Israel, the Nakba, which is the displacement of hundreds of thousands Of Palestinians. And we've talked about the rise of Netanyahu quite a lot. We can do more on that. And we may actually do a members episode getting into that again. People where we are because we've been so distracted by Ukraine and Trump and Canadian elections and Australian elections in Britain that attention has gone off the Middle East. The big story, of course, at the centre of all this is Trump announcing that his plan is to remove the entire population of Gaza, two million people, push them into Jordan and Egypt. He seems to be very, very keen on other countries taking refugees. He's not very keen on taking refugees himself in the United States. He's not volunteering to put them up in the US. And then he's going to build this Riviera. And he's made it clear in subsequent statements that the Palestinians will not be coming back. So this is full ethnic cleansing and this development in Gaza. This, of course, has given incredible cover to the right wing and to the more extremist elements in Israel who have talked openly about ethnic cleansing and getting rid of Palestinians, But who've been held in check by the longstanding US position of a two-state solution. In other words, there should be a Palestinian state as well as an Israeli state. And here we have Trump and Trump's ambassador-designate saying clearly he doesn't recognize any form of Palestine. And that then of course goes to the member's question, which is what's happening on the West Bank. So while the conflict continues on and off in Gaza, and at the moment there is a fragile peace fire, while there is a strong disagreement about hostage return. So while that continues, and I'm afraid the bottom line on Gaza is that now that Trump has checked out, it is extremely unlikely that there's going to be any serious plan to reconstruct Gaza or bring peace to Gaza, because that relied a lot on the US convincing Saudi, Egypt, Jordan to get involved. And what he's just done is alienate them all and duck out of that whole thing. Anyway, while that's going on, on the West Bank, which is obviously that whole part of Palestinian territory around Ramallah, around Nablus, around Hebron, which is the core of the Palestinian state along with Gaza, and which has been intruded on endlessly since 1967 by Israeli settlements. So there are now hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlements. And those settlements are surrounded by fences, and that divides that territory up into these tiny little fenced communities with checkpoints, making it very difficult for Palestinians To move in and out. Under the cover of Gaza, right-wing settler movements spearheaded by Smotrich, who is himself not just a finance minister, but an open settler, have been driving to expand those settlements, Take more Palestinian territory, and for the first time, rolling Israeli tanks into places that they haven't been for well over a decade and undermining the Palestinian authority. I think yet again, using the opportunity of Trump to try to fulfill Smotrich's dream, which is a dream that the whole, in his words, historic state of Israel, by which he means everything On the West Bank, right up to the Jordan River, becomes part of Israel and that any Palestinians left there either succumb to Israeli rule without a vote or are expelled or if they attempt To resist are killed. Now, that's still not formal Israeli government policy, but it's definitely what's coming from the right. And it's definitely what Netanyahu has been enabling and Trump has made more plausible than it would have been 50 days ago. Yeah. (Time 0:16:50)
Bush's Two-State Stance
George W. Bush advocated for a two-state solution while standing with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.
This contrasts sharply with current political stances.
Transcript:
Speaker 5
There's one bit in this film where George W.
Alastair Campbell
Bush is standing alongside Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian leader, outside the White House. And he delivers this. And just remember what most British people thought of George Bush at the time, right? Not very much. I, as you know, always kind of liked him and found him a lot more impressive than most Brits did. But he does this speech. And I was watching it with Fiona and I said, oh my God, there's not a single word of that that Trump would say today. It was all about we have to do what is necessary (Time 0:23:26)
Reliance on US Reliability
Trump's actions highlight the danger of relying on a predictable US international order.
His unpredictability forces a reassessment of long-held assumptions.
Transcript:
Speaker 5
Welcome back to The Rest is Apologies, Question Time with me, Alastair Campbell. And me, Rory Stewart. I have a quick one here just to finish off a thought that you had before the break.
Rory Stewart
So it's from another member. So thank you, Ray, for being a member. Do you believe it might be possible to revert back to the international system that existed before Trump once and if he leaves power in four years in terms of security position in the US alongside Europe and even aid for developing countries? I mean, you made the big point, which is he has this extraordinary capacity to change the story every two days. And of course, the old stories don't go away. So it's difficult to remember that just as he is pulling the rug out from under Ukraine and effectively handing Ukraine to Vladimir Putin, it's still the case that Canada faces the risk Of 25% tariffs about to be imposed by Trump. Gaza continues to be the subject of Trump's fantasy of ethnically cleansing 2 million Palestinians out of Gaza. He is still talking about acquiring Greenland from Denmark. So that's the first point, that we must find a way of trying to tell the full story and the full US domestic story, which we'll return to, I hope, next week. The incredible things that he's doing in terms of ripping the American government to pieces, challenging American justices, and providing these extraordinary occurrences, including A recent one where he's just cleared a man who gave a massive donation to his crypto coin. Oh, I saw that. Incredible. But as for putting it together again, I'm afraid you can't quite put it together again, because the unspoken assumption for 80 years is that you could absolutely rely on the US. And our entire NATO forces were based around the assumption of a US alliance, that whatever else happened, we shared intelligence with them. Our entire military systems were integrated into their big command and control systems. Our planes flew from their coordination out of Qatar. And as soon as someone like Trump comes along, the veil is lifted. And for the first time, we're forced to confront the fact that actually we've been living in a dreamland for 70, 80 years, and it's just too dangerous to believe in a reliable US international Order. (Time 0:25:01)
UK-EU Relations
A new formal structure is needed for UK-EU relations, going beyond ad-hoc meetings.
This structure should include defense cooperation and economic ties.
Transcript:
Rory Stewart
So new structures are going to emerge. Yes. I mean, coming on the back of that, we've had a number of questions about whether this is not the chance. It's Keith Faceweasel. I presume that's not his actual surname. Why is Starmer clinging on to a burnt bridge? Surely it's time to cut ties after Andrew's viewing the Overlaw First. Start discussing how we rejoin the EU. There'll be no better time than now. He's squandering what could be our only opportunity. Now, I would say that there is a really, really good opportunity, which is neither fully rejoining the EU at the moment, nor is it doing what Starmer's doing. Starmer's doing a sort of piecemeal. We had this actually when we interviewed Peter Kahn on leading long story about how we're going to take it step by step and we'll work with Europeans on various individual issues. I think the middle ground is imagining a proper formal structure which brings in the UK, Turkey, Norway, possibly even Ukraine itself, which isn't just ad hoc, where you really begin To develop, deepen a customs union, so economic connections, and really deepen the formal structures of defence cooperation. And the reason why it can't just be ad hoc, in other words, it can't just be something that you make little decisions on step by step every week, is that actually building European defence Structures requires unbelievable long-term investments. Long-term investments, not just in producing kit, but also in this whole question of interoperability, which is what do you need in place for the British, French, German, Polish, Turkish armies to speak to each other in the absence of the US, which currently provides that big overarching system, which allows us to speak to each other. So formal structures, formal structures, formal structures, that doesn't mean necessarily being a full member of the EU, but it means something much more than just ad hoc meetings From time to time. (Time 0:30:00)
Rory Stewart's Changed Views
Rory Stewart changed his mind about Boris Johnson's electability after Johnson became Prime Minister.
His views on Afghanistan shifted after spending time in Afghan villages.
Transcript:
Speaker 5
Has anyone ever got you to change your mind on a big issue? How did they do it? I've got a couple, but I'm going to go you first. I have changed minds on big issues.
Rory Stewart
Sometimes, of course, my mind is changed by events, which is that I expect something to happen and then it doesn't happen. I guess it's really tough, isn't it? Me just run through things that I was wrong on. I believed that Boris Johnson would never be prime minister. What would it have taken to convince me that the British public would embrace Boris Johnson when I thought he was completely unsuitable?
Alastair Campbell
They elected him.
Rory Stewart
They elected him, yeah. What would it take to really make me understand why young men would not just say they support Trump, but very unusually, in a way that they didn't in the previous 18, 20, 22 elections, Turn out in large numbers for Trump in key places? I guess a lot of this is getting out on the ground, isn't it? And it's really difficult because, of course, you can never meet enough people to get anything more than an anecdotal feel. And the social scientists will always say, you can't put too much emphasis on that. But certainly with Afghanistan, what changed my mind more than anything else was 32 nights in Afghan village houses listening to Afghans talk about their government and religion. And by the end of that, those individual conversations completely convinced me that all the dreams of the technocrats and the international governments were pie in the sky and Afghan Communities wouldn't accept them.
Alastair Campbell
Anyway, over to you. There's a couple of things. One I've told you before, Johan Harry's book on drugs changed my mind about drugs. I was fully signed up to the war on drugs approach. And that book, I was probably halfway there. I think when we change our mind or we have our minds changed, I think we're sort of probably on the move and something comes along and sparks it. But Johan Harry's book definitely had a big impact on me and made me think about it in a different way. And I've stuck with that. And then I think the other big change of mind has actually been my daughter, Grace, and her friends. (Time 0:32:30)
Al-Julani Interview Impact
Al-Julani's interview was successful in the Middle East, revealing his personality.
The interview explored whether someone with his past can change.
Transcript:
Alastair Campbell
And also, Grace very proudly tells me that she doesn't listen to our podcast, but no doubt her friends who do will tell her that I've mentioned this. But her response will probably be, well, when are you ever going to empty the dishwasher then? Anyway, listen, there's a really good question here, Roy. This is quite challenging for us. Doloroso, do you accept that al-Julani is a mass murderer? Why did you treat him with such deference and respect? Don't you know that HTS al-Qaeda is and what it does? Are you unaware of the Turkish insurgents in Syria? Record of war crimes. What's it doing now in northeast Syria?
Rory Stewart
I mean, I'm slightly surprised that Doloroso is taking that for you if they listen to the podcast, because we were very, very clear, particularly when we spent that 20 minutes, which I think is at the end in the YouTube version and is at the beginning in the audio version or the other way around, where we did say, this guy was a member of al-Qaeda Iraq. Al-Qaeda Iraq was one of the most uniquely unpleasant terrorist organizations in the world. This was the organization of al-Zaqawi. This was the organization that chopped people's heads off on television and filmed it. This was the organization that gave birth to ISIS and everything that followed under Baghdadi in terms of the enslaving of Yazidi women, the killing of homosexuals, the brutal imposition Of Sharia law. We discussed the fact that Al-Qaeda in Syria, even when it broke away from Daesh, from ISIS, did suicide bombing. We discussed the fact that Jelani was very senior. He was the emir in Syria, and he would only have been sent to Syria because he was very senior within the Al-Qaeda network. We discussed the fact that he pledged allegiance to Zawahiri, effectively to Osama bin Laden. And of course, Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri are the people who put together the 9-11 attacks. So I don't think we in any way concealed this.
Speaker 5
And I think the fundamental question that we are asking ourselves and trying to get to is, can someone change? The other thing I say to Dolor Rosa, I think we treated him with respect, but not deference.
Alastair Campbell
And also, we were very keen to do the interview. We didn't make any deals as to what we could or couldn't ask, as sometimes happens when some people interview others. We could have asked anything that we wanted. But I think the most interesting thing is a fact that he is now the leader of Syria. The thing that was most interesting was how he went from where he was to where he now is. And most importantly, what he's going to do now and how he's going to do it. So I suspect, I don't know Doloroso, but I suspect you probably just think that we shouldn't ever talk to people like that. In fact, this also comes out in the Norma Percy documentary series because George Mitchell, another of our leading... I counted half a dozen people in the series that we interviewed, or we've interviewed on leading, but George Mitchell was making the direct comparison between the long time it took To get success in the Northern Ireland peace process with the seemingly never-ending time that it's taking to make similar progress in the Middle East.
Speaker 5
And if people decide they're never, ever, ever going to talk to people because they've done bad things in the past, where do we go? The other thing is I am really proud of that interview we did with Al Jalani. We travelled (Time 0:36:51)
US Democrats and Student Activism
US Democrats struggle with opposition leadership due to a non-parliamentary system.
Student demonstrations focus on Gaza, not Trump's domestic actions, due to perceived ineffectiveness and fear of reprisal.
Transcript:
Rory Stewart
People want to know about him. And I think we were one of the first interviewers to really begin to reveal some of his personality without answering this fundamental question, which is still an open question. Can somebody with that past change? Right. Here's my Alison Burgess last question. Is the lack of opposition party leadership inherent within the US political system, the main reason why the Dems don't land any punches on a clearly dysfunctional government, even Within the struggling Badenock, there's at least some sort of coordination to opposition in the UK. Alison's absolutely right that one of the problems is there isn't a leader of the opposition because it's not a parliamentary system in the same way. And people like Nancy Pelosi are very much being pushed aside and the Democrats are struggling to find a single unifying voice. But there's something also that I noticed. I'm talking to you having just come back from Yale. And I'm very struck teaching there, that there and at other universities, there were these huge demonstrations against Gaza, but there have not been huge demonstrations against Donald Trump. And I've been asking students why this is, given that what he's doing domestically has many of the hallmarks of fascism, and what he's doing internationally is destroying the global System. And there seemed to be a number of answers to that. One was that they felt that they'd completely failed to make any progress with their Gaza demonstrations. Secondly, that Trump's administration has been asking the universities for the names of people who participate in demonstrations and are threatening to deport them, putting the Universities in a very difficult situation on do they shop their own students to the US government. And thirdly, and this is a real problem which you'll be familiar with from the British left, some of them are so left-wing that they basically believe all American governments are fascist Anyway. There's absolutely no difference between Biden and Trump. They were reluctant to vote for Kamala Harris. And when we say to them, you know, the US government is going to be complicit in ethnic cleansing in Gaza, it's going to annex Greenland, it's going to turn against its closest allies, Canada, it's going to sell out Ukraine to Putin. They just shrug and say, isn't this what we've always done? And one of my challenges in trying to make the argument for the Democrats and liberal global order is dealing not just with the aggression of the right, but the cynicism of the left. (Time 0:40:45)
Vance, Orban, and Zelensky
J.D. Vance admires Orban's control over universities, a hallmark of fascism.
Zelensky's refusal to express gratitude to Trump highlights his understanding of freedom.
Transcript:
Alastair Campbell
That isn't about lying and bullying and intimidation, but is about finding a politics that breaks through to people in a way that at the moment the left appear unable to do. My last question, Rory, I enjoy your book, film and TV recommendations, but Rory, I get the feeling you skim read rather than read whole books because you seem to read so many at the same Time. I can confirm that because I've seen him do it on planes.
Rory Stewart
He has several tabs open at the same time, but he's moving from book to book. It's completely true. Small recommendation before I come to you on documentaries. A lovely, lovely piece by Michael Ignatieff, which he did on Substack, on Zelensky and gratitude, which we'll put in the links. (Time 0:46:01)
