Has Starmer done Burnham any favours?

0:02Sky News, the full story first.

0:12Harriet Harman: There's only ever so many people that sit in a cabinet. There's only ever so many ministers. So for you to get one, somebody else has to not get one. Why have your MPs rejected you after such a short time? Well,

0:29Ruth Davidson: People say, oh, I didn't realise that trying to grab her and kiss her in the back of the taxi was not OK. Men do realise it's not OK.

0:40Harriet Harman: Hello and welcome to Electoral Dysfunction with me, Ruth Davidson. And me, Harriet Harman. And that's it, because it's just us. In the end, Beth wasn't on her sofa for the World Cup semi-final. She was somewhere else entirely, and we will explain in just a second. In fact, you might already have seen where she's up to by now. I might explain where I am right now. So I'm still on my holidays in Spain. The Wi-Fi at my hotel and apartment complex went down. So I've now found the lovely people at the magic pirate island Natura complex who've let me set up in their pirate forecourt. There's cutlasses and barrels and all sorts over there.

1:21Harriet Harman: So if you do see people running around in the background, going up to this bar that's right next to me, I do apologise, but we are up and running.

1:29Ruth Davidson: Well, it looks very nice behind you, but it doesn't look as sunny as it is in London, Ruth. What's the weather like?

1:34Harriet Harman: It is a little bit overcast today, but it's still 31 degrees. So if a little pearl of sweat just goes inside here, it's because I am outside, getting a tan before I head back to Scotland.

1:45Ruth Davidson: Well, so Ruth and I, although we're missing Beth, we have got some other company on this episode. We've recruited the excellent Rob Ford, Professor of Political Science at Manchester University and one of Sky's excellent election analysts to join the pod. Welcome, Rob. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me.

2:02Harriet Harman: And Rob, just so our dysfunctioners can know you a bit better, and I'm not going to say they're going to judge you for your answer here, but think about what you say very carefully. In terms of favourite elections to analyse, most people have a favourite biscuit or a packet of crisps. But as an election analyst, I want to know what's your favourite election? I would have to say my favourite election to analyse, because as an academic, you're always attracted to persistent mysteries. And for me, the 2017 election is still the most mystifying election for us sophologists. Part of the story was pretty clear.

2:35What happened with like Theresa May's vote increase was pretty clear. But the Labour increase in 2017 is really unusual in the way that it's spread evenly across the country, evenly across social groups. That's not normally how things have been going in our country recently. So that was my favourite election to analyse. My favourite election to watch was 1997 because my dad let me stay up overnight when I was a teenager and it was the first election I was allowed to watch the results live. So that's probably what got me hooked on it. But 2017, that's the one that's still the nut we still have to crack in terms of figuring out what happened.

3:04Ruth Davidson: Rob, you live and breathe data about public opinion. What's been the most interesting bit of polling about Andy Burnham? The bit of polling I picked out here, it's always a very useful corrective. Those of us who like work in politics, who analyse politics day in, day out, it's always very difficult to take a step outside our heads and understand just how little attention the average voter is paying to politics. So my favourite pair of polling foundings that I just dug up are one from More in Common that shows that a majority of voters don't actually have an opinion on Andy Burnham yet, approve or disapprove.

3:39They're withholding judgment. And that might be in part because of the second polling finding that I just dug up, which is that 40 % of voters couldn't recognise Andy Burnham when shown a photograph of him by JL Partners. They couldn't give his name. Maybe if it had been prompted, that might have come down a bit. They might be like, oh, that bloke from Manchester or something like that. But I think what both of these whole findings show is that most people, most of the time, are not really thinking about politics very much, which means that actually there's an awful lot to play for if you're an incoming prime minister.

4:11Harriet Harman: That's really interesting, Rob, because I kind of think that there's a ubiquity about Andy Burnham. And clearly the way he ran the Maker Fiat by-election with the kind of the graphic with the specs and stuff like that, that he thinks his image is something that's instantly recognisable too. So the idea that he's still going to have to do a lot running in his first 100 dates to get established, it kind of vindicates his decision to only do things like Reddit and Gary Lineker instead of doing proper big political interviews with political editors or the Andrew Neill sit down or any of that sort of stuff.

4:41Harriet Harman: But it does strike me as odd that we're about to change prime minister and the country's overwhelming sort of idea of it all is may. Yeah, to be clear, it's not unusual. And it's not like Burnham is an underperformer on this score. Basically, every incoming prime minister starts with this issue that people don't really know who they are. And Burnham does run a long way ahead of other Labour politicians. I mean, it's a pretty depressing set of findings if you're a Labour front-bencher in terms of how many people could pick you out of a line-up or how many people have an opinion of you. So he is better known than practically anybody else on the Labour side of politics, except for the outgoing prime minister.

5:19but still an awful lot of people who aren't paying attention. So I think you're absolutely right, Ruth. This is why he's doing unorthodox forms of media, because that's where that 50 % who don't really have a view of him yet, that's where they are. So if you want to form a good first impression with them, you've got to go to where they go. There's no point in doing the big politics shows where everyone already has a view of you who watches those.

5:40Ruth Davidson: He's pretty well known in Greater Manchester, having been the mayor there for nearly the best part of 10 years. So I reckon the first thing he's got to do is introduce himself to the country. I remember Tony Blair having been on the breakfast television sofa talking about his daughter's, I think it was her 10th birthday party, and me saying, why on earth were you talking about your daughter's birthday party on breakfast television? He was saying, you know, if you are going to lead your country, if they're going to let you be their prime minister, you have to let them get to know you. So I guess the first thing that Andy Burnham's got to do is to introduce himself to the country so that they can get to know him in the same way that people in Greater Manchester already obviously do.

6:23Yeah, I think that's right. And I mean, he has been very effective at that as a mayor up here in Greater Manchester. He is very good at projecting an image of himself as a kind of everyday guy who likes his football, likes to go down the pub, loves Manchester, loves its culture and everything like that. I mean, obviously, there's a sort of art to this, as you guys will know. It's slightly constructed, an image of yourself as an everyday person. It's actually very carefully curated and somewhat artificial when you look at the details of it. But when people are hearing about you for the first time, if that first impression they get is, oh, he sounds like somebody I could share a pint with, somebody I could talk to, that's a wonderful first impression to get.

7:06And I think one of the things that's different about the mayoral jobs, to say a lot of the Westminster jobs, is that's something you've got to be doing from day one. The whole job is kind of you are the sort of front man for a particular part of the country. So you've really got to burnish those skills in order to do that job well.

7:25Harriet Harman: And of course, Rob, he's been leaning into being of Manchester and the champion of Manchester, not just while he was the mayor of Manchester, but even as part of this going to become the next prime minister. Of course, from Monday, he's going to have a new address. It won't be in Manchester. That one will be in London. But before we talk about his move into number 10, let's hear from Beth, who's been speaking to the bloke who's about to move his stuff out of number 10. Hello gang, this is Beth checking in and if you could picture me now you would laugh because I'm sitting on a train coming back from Ukraine under a blanket with a pillow on my head as I try to get the sound okay so that you can hear me and not just the sound of the train.

8:08So if you do hear any background noise because I am on this overnight sleep train coming back from this 24 hour trip with the Prime Minister to Ukraine, then please forgive me. And I will get my team to take a photo of me because I look truly ridiculous. But look, I really hope you forgive me because the reason I couldn't make the pod this week is I came to Ukraine with the prime minister to witness his final foreign trip as our country's PM. And on that trip, he gave me his very last interview in office. So it's quite a big deal to be able to conduct that interview. It's full of all sorts of things.

8:51He was very strong on support for Ukraine, saying he believes Ukraine will win the war and that Andy Burnham has offered him reassurances. And he hinted heavily that Andy Burnham's offered him reassurances that he'll continue that legacy when he comes into office on Monday. He was also much more open, softer, more reflective than I've seen him before in an interview, speaking quite movingly about going from the biggest job in the country representing the UK on the international stage back to in his words the most important job and I think you get in this interview a bit of what Keir Starmer is more like behind closed doors a bit more of Starmer uncut I would say and look whatever you think about Keir Starmer he was hugely successful in becoming Labour leader and then going on to win that general election, even though what followed was him struggling in office.

9:53Starmer will hope, I think, that history will judge him more kindly than his party did. And in this interview, you can hear him set out what he sees as his legacy and talk less of mistakes and more of where he thought he put the country on the right track. Have a listen to him here. Let us know what you think. And you can also catch the full interview on all Sky News platforms. Prime Minister, you're here in Ukraine today. This is your last big act as Prime Minister. What's your message to President Zelensky as you prepare to stand down? My message to President Zelensky is one I delivered at the press conference, but I'd also delivered privately to him.

10:38and that is that the UK commitment to Ukraine will not waver. We will be there for as long as it takes and a long time afterwards and it was really important as I stepped down that I told that to President Zelensky and I wouldn't have said it publicly if I hadn't had the opportunity to talk it through with him privately and I'm absolutely confident that the UK support will not waver. You also said something you haven't said before today you said you now believe ukraine can win this war you haven't said that before i believe ukraine will win this war um i think that the last six months have been a real turning point because at the beginning of the conflict um everybody assumed that russia would win within a matter of weeks um we are now in year five and what has happened in that time is um ukraine has begun to push back on the front this year i remember the early days seeing their capability to now world-leading capability.

11:39What they've shown is that it's not just the size of your army, it's how you fight a modern conflict. And so they are probably the most effective fighting machine in Europe. PM, you've spent a lot of time on foreign affairs. You care deeply, clearly about Ukraine. You've worked very hard with Zelensky and Macron. You're clearly leaving office before you are ready. You would not have chosen to go now. Why have your MPs rejected you after such a short time? Well, the way I look at this is not just the two years we've had in government, but the six and a half years that I've been on the front line.

12:18I took over the leadership of the Labour Party early in 2020. We had just lost the 2019 election. That was the worst election result for the Labour Party since 1935. And most people thought the Labour Party is finished, it will never win again. So for the parliamentary party the question who was the right person to save our party, to take it to victory in a general election and second biggest majority ever of a Labour government, that's answered, I've answered that question. They're now asking the question who's best to take us into 2029. They've given the answer to that question. Do you think if you'd stayed on you could have won the next election?

13:00Labour could have won with you as the leader? I've always believed we would win the next election, but the decision about who's best placed to take us into 2029 is a decision the Parliamentary Party has taken. I accept it in good grace. So you sort of almost had to put your own ego aside a bit in that moment. I think it was very, I've always said country first and I've always meant country first. And that means in the end, I felt I had to take the decision what was in the best interest of the country. And I do that with good grace because that is what I've lived by. That is the right thing to do.

13:34Can I ask you, what did Vic say to you? What did Vic think? Well, I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of what Vic said. But I can tell you this. Through every step, she's been with me. The good, the bad, the challenging, the great moments, the victory nights, the really low moments when somebody tried to burn our house down, our family house, when my brother died. The last few months, which have not been easy, but she's been there at my side every step of the way. And so that's why we had to take the decision together. And when you walk out of the door for the final time on Monday, how do you think you're going to feel?

14:16Is it going to be relief, pride, sadness, a big cocktail of emotion? I go with pride. I go knowing that I leave the country in a better state than I found it. And I go knowing I've left the foundation for Labour to win the next general election. And I go out and I will immediately that afternoon spend time with Vic and the kids. And I look forward to that. So my final question is, as you hand on the baton, you believe that you set Andy Burnham up to win the next general election. And part of the next phase of this administration's success is your success. I hope so. We've built the foundation for this now.

14:54And Labour can go on and win that election. I think we'll go on and win that election. I'm proud to hand over the party in good shape to Andy Burnham, hand over the country in good shape to Andy Burnham. I will support him all the way. I'll give advice if it's asked for. And I'll give it privately. I will not give advice if it's not asked for. And I certainly won't give it publicly. I will give my full support. And that is what I mean. I want my country to thrive. and I'm sure it will be a great success going forward.

15:24Ruth Davidson: If you want to watch all of Beth's interview with Keir Starmer, the last interview she'll do with him as Prime Minister, there's a link in the show notes.

15:31Harriet Harman: And actually our members episode on Tuesday was all about how Prime Ministers try to leave a legacy. So could Keir learn anything from Tony Blair or Theresa May? We had a really good chat about it. If you want to be an insider and get those extra Tuesday episodes, it's skynews.com forward slash electoral dysfunction. direction so robin in terms of of a keir starmer legacy if you were picking sort of three words what would your three words be for for keir starmer oh that's quite a tough one to be honest i mean i think the fact that i have to think quite hard straight away as someone who follows politics 24 7 it kind of sums up the legacy in a way that i think indecisive disappointing and maybe not political enough which isn't one word but i was trying to think of an alternative word for that I think he just seemed to be someone who was much better at the job of opposition than he was at the job of government, if we're honest.

16:23And that seemed to be quite clear relatively early on. We can look at the whole span of his polling now because obviously he's coming to a close at the end of this week. And the poll numbers really sort of fall very sharply quite early on. I mean, they were even falling during the election campaign as well. well, this is one of the things that gets forgotten about the 2024 election, is that Labour dropped all the way through that campaign and then underperformed the polling very substantially. It was one of the biggest polling errors in modern polling history against Labour. And so it does seem that the more voters saw of Keir Starmer, even in the general election campaign itself, the less they liked.

17:00Harriet Harman: Yeah, I think that's really interesting. I think because the majority was so big, everybody's forgotten about the underlying figures of it, not just the polling and the discrepancy there, but the number of people that physically voted for Labour actually wasn't as high and the percentage wasn't that high, particularly not for the overwhelming majority that they got. But in terms of Q Starmer, yesterday's man already moved on. We know that Andy Burnham is going to be first the leader of the Labour Party and then the Prime Minister. But can you explain to us why they don't happen simultaneously?

17:30Harriet Harman: Why he gets like one job first and then another job after? The short answer is because there are different jobs with different appointment processes. In theory, in a world where there were more challenges, we would be having a contest for the leadership of the Labour Party, which is decided internally as a Labour Party matter. There aren't any other contenders, so it's a coronation rather than a contest. But the Labour Party does not have the power to name somebody Prime Minister. That would be a rather dubious thing to give any political party. So it's the king who appoints prime ministers after they have convinced him that they can form a government, a viable government with a majority in the commons.

18:13So after Andy Burnham is named as leader of the Labour Party, he will go to the palace and then be appointed as prime minister. That's the constitutional process. So that's why those two things are held separate, because one is a partisan process internal to the Labour Party, and the other is a constitutional process that determines who our government is. And of course, after that, he'll start naming his ministers, who also are appointed, of course, by the king. I think there's been some speculation in the media about why he hasn't named people in advance. Well, one big reason that he doesn't is because that would be a violation of the way that this process works.

18:46It's supposed to be done with the advice and consent of the monarch and so forth. So you can't just go around floating names in the press before you've even got the job.

18:58Harriet Harman: OK, so I've got a question here that we've had in from the Burner phone. This is from Andrew, who asks, why did Labour MPs back Burnham so unanimously? Is it a genuine interest in the country's well-being? Or is it, as Harriet said, the hairs moving and everyone being scared to step out of line? And if it's the latter, will the electorate punish them for being a bit cowardly?

19:20Ruth Davidson: Well, I think there's been a lot of cynicism about the fact that Andy Burnham got the nominations for leadership from 300 plus of the Labour MPs. And it's been suggested, oh, they're all sucking up to Andy Burnham because they think he's going to be prime minister and they all want ministerial jobs. I think what they've wanted to do is show unity and show support for the new leader and kind of give an impression of stability after the instability and the political shock of the parliamentary Labour Party ejecting Keir Starmer. So I think the cynicism can be overplayed. Most of the MPs who nominated him just want him to do well, want to show their support and want him to get off to a strong start.

20:09Ruth Davidson: and I think that it's not at all to do with being scared to step out of line. I think it's whether or not you just want to show to the public a unified face. I think MPs know that the public hate infighting, factionalism, instability in government and after all we promised in 2024 that we would be different from the Tories and that we would have stability and not a churn of prime ministers and ministers and yet only two years in once again there's a change of prime Minister. So I think there's leaning into stability and a real sense that this has got to be made to work with Andy Burnham. We can't just try this one and then if that doesn't work out, chuck him out with another one, because that will cement the notion really that we're getting into political short-termism, that instead of having a general election, five years and another general election, and that's the terms of your Prime Minister, that somehow you chop and change all the way through.

21:03Ruth Davidson: And that's not good for politics. It's not good for the country.

21:05Harriet Harman: Is there any sort of penalty for that, Rob? Because if I look across the Atlantic, my sense from the Hillary Clinton campaign is she was always slightly kicked around for the fact that the Democrats had decided it was the time for women and she didn't have a proper kind of really rigorous campaign to make her the Democratic nominee. But when things get tough, and they will because we know that the inbox for Andy Burnham is difficult in the same way as it was difficult for Keir Starmer, will there be any sort of penalty for the sense that the public didn't get to put them in place they didn't get a say they didn't there was no rigorous kind of audition for them i think this is one of the places where we're quite different from the u.s actually ruth the u.s the whole process is open primaries all the way through they are used to directly electing their executives both within parties and then in general elections too whereas our system it's indirect it's parliamentary so the idea that you can change leaders midway through a parliamentary term is established feature of the system.

22:06And what you will always see when we get a change of prime minister midway through parliament, and obviously, we've got a few recently, so we get a decent sample size, is you'll get a bunch of polling saying voters don't like this, they don't think it's the right thing to do, they think you should have a general election. And then within a few months of the change happening, everyone forgets about it. Because this is one of the classic issues we get with polling, there's a big difference between I'm willing to shoot my mouth off on this and it actually matters to me in my day-to-day life. So some pollster sticks an email in your inbox and says, do you like this?

22:39You say no. Do you even remember it the next week? Also no. Where it does matter, I think, and where we have seen examples of it mattering, is the indirect problem, the audition thing. You need to polish your talents in order to make your case to voters. And an internal contest is one way to do that. Some leaders who've come in midway have stumbled pretty badly when faced with that challenge. Of course, Liz Truss being the classic example of this, that may be less of an issue for Burnham because he has spent a number of years polishing his communications talents. He is the politician with the second largest direct electoral mandate in the country.

23:18This is one of the unusual features of having directly elected mayors now. These people are used to wandering around very large, quite diverse chunks of the country, making their case to a quite broad constituency, which makes them more like US governors, for example, who are often the people who do best in presidential races as well.

23:36Ruth Davidson: But I think whatever the situation is in terms of polling of people and the question of the changing of prime ministers, it really does matter for the job of government if there's a big turnover, because it takes a long time to get to grips with the machinery of government. It takes a long time to build up all the relationships which enable you to get things done with the civil service, with other ministers, with stakeholders outside, with business. And that's one of the main reasons why you don't want a big turnover and instability, because it just interferes with getting on with the job. And that, above all, is what Andy Burnham and his team is going to need to do.

24:19Ruth Davidson: But I think one of the reasons why the herd moved away from Keir Starmer and towards Andy Burnham, which is the parliamentary Labour Party, is the fear of reform. That just became something which gripped the parliamentary Labour Party. And it wasn't just, I'm going to lose my seat, I was elected in 2024, and I'm going to be a one term MP, and then thrown on the scrap heap. It was a real sense of we cannot be the MPs who usher in Farage into Downing Street, who actually oversee the arrival of a reform government. I think it was that fear. And then when Andy Burnham showed that he could beat reform in Makerfield, which had been becoming a heartland of theirs, that's when people thought, well, we're just going to have to go with that to head off reform and Farage.

25:12Harriet Harman: I'm interested in that, Harriet, because the kind of Labour parliamentary mood has been a character in this play of what's happened. And you say that fear of being the government that handed the country to reform was a genuine fear. But we've seen, since all of this kicked off, we've actually seen a route to which reform could perhaps fall apart and not be the electoral force that people are expecting next year. We also have seen, for example, a prime minister's questions. It was actually quite emotional on Wednesday. And I think there was a lot of people that saw the decency of Keir Starmer and Kemi, for that matter, in that.

25:46Harriet Harman: And we've also had, for example, one of Andy Burnham's outriders, Lou Haig, saying that, you know, his team had been planning this for a year. So it doesn't look as spontaneous as it did. Is there any sort of unease or a slight change of mood since this all kicked off six, seven weeks ago?

26:02Ruth Davidson: No, I think that that hope is still there, coupled with a natural apprehension as to how he's going to meet what are incredibly difficult challenges.

26:13Harriet Harman: In terms of his team around him, because it's not always, as you've said, Rob, it's not always about the leader themselves. It's about who else can cut through and who can be seen as the sort of people that you would go for a pint with and look in touch with the country. I think it's the one the pollsters always use, who's in touch with the country. One of the big conversations that we've had is who's going to be the next Chancellor? And we saw an enormous push for it to be Ed Miliband from within certain factions of Labour. The pushback has sort of started in the whispers that are happening. I'm kind of interested, away from whether he gets the job or not, whether the polling on Ed has changed much.

26:53I don't think the polling on Ed Miliband has changed an awful lot, Which is a little bit surprising, again, given those of us who follow politics very closely know that his kind of image within the sort of world of professional politicians has changed quite a lot. He wasn't necessarily regarded as a very successful Labour leader towards the end of his term as leader, but he's been widely fated as the most effective minister in the Starmer cabinet. But with the broader public, I don't really think his image has moved an awful lot. I mean, he would probably fall just behind Burnham in terms of Labour politicians that the public have heard of and have a view of.

27:34But often I suspect that view will reflect their distant memories of his time as Labour leader rather than his performance in his current job, which is just less high profile with a lot of voters.

27:46Ruth Davidson: Well, I hope, listening to what Rob's saying there, I hope that Andy Burnham, and in fact, I'm sure he isn't, is sitting there with the ratings of the cabinet ministers and would-be cabinet ministers and looking at their public opinion, satisfaction or otherwise. Because ultimately, and this is what we're always having to get back to, government is about doing the job to actually improve people's standards of living, to improve the prospects for young people to sort out public services. and he's got to get in his new cabinet. He's got to have a political breadth so he can keep the party together.

28:22Ruth Davidson: He's got to have regional reflection. You can't have all your cabinet members from London or all your cabinet members to be from the North West. He's got to have a gender balance. You can't have the old boys network where women don't get a look in. But above all, he's got to have people who can get on and do the job for him. And I think that's one of the reasons that Ed Miliband has been putting his name forward is that having been in the Treasury with Gordon Brown for many years and was chair of the Council of Economic Advisors in the Treasury, he knows the Treasury. He knows how to do the job.

28:59Ruth Davidson: He could actually hit the ground running in the most important job. It's a hard job being prime minister, isn't it? And perhaps one of the most important jobs is picking your top team. And I think it's going to be two o 'clock on Monday that we're going to start seeing those names coming forward. And at that point, I hope they don't start thinking like I'm going to be, is going off to my holiday in Ibiza. I hope that they will be going into their departments and sweating it out on the long, hot summer because they have got to hit the ground running. I really hope they don't think, phew, I've been appointed to the cabinet.

29:34Ruth Davidson: Now I can go on my family holiday. I know it's a tough thing to say, but I think that's what people will see. Do you remember when Gordon Brown was first appointed as Prime Minister and he went off on his holiday and sat on a beach in Cornwall in his suit and tie?

29:49Harriet Harman: It was a sports jacket. Come on, let's not introduce him. He wore a sports jacket and he took his tie off. History has changed it in my mind.

29:55Ruth Davidson: But then there was floods and then there was blue tongue disease among sheep. And he immediately went back to number 10 and did get back into his suit and tie. And you know, at the end of the day, when you're a cabinet minister, when you're prime minister, you've just got to be on the job the whole time. And I think if it looks like an energetic, purposeful, committed team who's dealing with all the problems the country's got while all the rest of us go on holiday, I think that's how it should be.

30:23Harriet Harman: What happens if all your tests aren't met though? What happens if you've got to do a trade-off between the symbolism and the actual people that are the best qualified or have demonstrated the greatest ability or drive.

30:35Ruth Davidson: Well, I don't think it works out like that because by the time people have got to such a high level, they've all got a huge amount of merit. So I don't think it's an impossible choice. And then subsequently, he's got to lead them and hold them to account as being effective as they possibly can be. It's a tough job being prime minister. I'm glad I never was.

30:58Harriet Harman: I suspect the country's glad I never was as well. No, never, Harriet, never. I'm going to come back to you, Harriet, but Rob, just in terms of cut through, I know Harriet said that the personality test or the public test should not be a test of who gets a job for Andy Burnham. But generally, I sort of think that politicians seem smaller than they used to. You used to remember Douglas Hurd as education secretary, or you remember Ken Clarke or Norman Lamont, or some of these bigger figures, a Heseltine. Has there been a fall? And does it matter? Do you need, as a prime minister, to have a couple of other people that can go and do news night or be the defensive minister and speak for the government to keep you away from having to do all of that?

31:41Harriet Harman: Or does it work to make it more presidential and everything and the root of government always comes out of the mouth of the prime minister? On the point of fall off, one of the things I like to do on my summer holidays is take great big fat books of British political history onto the beach with me because I really know how to have fun. I tell you what, that sounds like it's kicking Ibiza into a cocked hat. I mean, I don't know if you're up at Manumission or whatever it's called these days, spinning the decks, Harriet, but Rob, he's down on the beach. He's got his, oh, I don't know, who do you take?

32:12Harriet Harman: You got a nice one on Disraeli? Maybe like Roy Jenkins' biography of Disraeli, something like that.

32:17Ruth Davidson: Oh, God, Rob, I hope you're taking my memoirs and Barbara Castle's memoirs as well. I do have your memoirs on my Kindle, Harriet, so they're on the list um but one of the nice things about does that count as fluff for you if you go yeah that's that's light reading that's light reading yeah um but one of the great things about reading that kind of stuff is it's a real corrective with the i think all of us are very very attracted to their oh for the heroes of yesteryear type nostalgic impulse oh the giants of the past and when you go back and read like that as it happened in the 50s or the 70s and stuff like this.

32:52These giants were not seen that way at the time, not by their fellow politicians, definitely not by the public. So this issue of like most people haven't heard of politicians and the ones they've heard of they don't like, that's a perennial for as long as we've had polling, quite frankly.

33:08Harriet Harman: Rob, I know you've got to go on. Thank you so much for joining us.

33:10Ruth Davidson: Thank you, Rob. Thank you so much. I think Rob's absolutely right. It's so irritating when people say, oh, you know, there were really huge, big figures in the past and now, you know, they're all shallow, insubstantial people. You know, that's just the passage of time. And also, the longer you're in politics, the more you're recognised.

33:32Harriet Harman: Because there was a generation there that had fought in a world war that came into politics post that in the 50s, 60s and 70s. So no matter what was in their background, there was also that kind of almost, it wasn't even grit, it was just that they had seen and done things that were considered substantial in a way that if you are, for example, an Andy Burnham, and you went to Cambridge and then you went and worked in the NHS because you were employed by Jess's mum, and then you worked as a special advisor for you for the time that you did, and then other special advisors within the Labour Party, and then got elected.

34:08Harriet Harman: He's not actually done that much that's not been directly involved in politics. And I think isn't that part of the difference?

34:15Ruth Davidson: The issue is what you do when you're in government, what you do when you're in politics, not necessarily what you've done before. You can have a great backstory and be no good as a minister, or you can have a very, you know, ordinary backstory and be a sensational minister. So I just think that there's too much kind of looking back through rose-tinted glasses, too much hindsight. And that takes people away from the focus of what they should be looking at, which is what is the person actually doing? I just think it's a waste of time looking back on the golden years. And also, as far as the generations is concerned, I've got full confidence that this generation of politicians, so long as it's not reform, and so long as they manage to bring the country and not let it fall apart with the divisive populism of reform, they will do great things as well.

35:08Harriet Harman: Well, I'm not going to press you on that, Harriet. You know, I've been reading what's been in the papers and all of the gossip and who's getting what job. But you do keep in very close contact with this generation within the party, not least because most of them work for you at some point or another. So go on, tell us this, Gini. Nobody's listening. It's just us. Just tell us what you've heard about who's getting what job.

35:27Ruth Davidson: Well, I think for the reasons Rob set out, which is that Andy Burnham is not yet Prime Minister, although he's leader of the Labour Party, and he won't be until the King has asked him to form a government. He absolutely would be breaching protocol and it would be kind of disrespectful for our unwritten constitution if he started to hand out jobs when he hasn't actually got the jobs. But the truth is, there's probably about three or four people, including Andy Burnham, who actually know what the situation is. And we're just going to have to cope until Monday at two o 'clock, at which point we'll actually know.

36:06Harriet Harman: You're such a disappointment, Harriet. I was wanting an inside track there.

36:15Ruth Davidson: Hi, producer Laura here. We'll get back to this episode of Electoral Dysfunction in a moment, but I'm just interrupting the podcast to remind you about our new Members Club. You will have heard Beth Reith and Harriet talk about Sky News Insider a lot lately. It's£2.99 a month and you get an extra episode from us every Tuesday. You might have seen already that Jess Phillips is back. She's back on the podcast with some of those members-only episodes. As part of your subscription, you will also get these Friday episodes completely ad-free. And if you listen to our sister podcast, Trump 100, or if you're interested in our new Sky News podcast, Stuff Matters, with Ed Conway, you can get ad-free listening and bonus episodes to both of those shows too.

36:51Ruth Davidson: It's all in the same bundle as your ED member subscription. You'll also get access to a host of new ways to interact directly with Beth, Ruth, Harriet, Jess and us, the team, who make the podcast. Terms and conditions apply. you can only become an insider if you're over the age of 18 and if you're in the UK. Subscription auto-renews at the regular price unless cancelled via my account. Cancel any time effective at the end of the billing period. Okay, that's enough from me. Back to Beth, Ruth and Harriet.

37:20Harriet Harman: One of the other things that's happening in Westminster at the moment is it's not just about who should get a job, but there's also a group of people that are compiling a list of people who should not get jobs. It's something called the Pestminster dossier. And I think we want to talk about this for just a second. So let me explain what we know. So the Times has reported this week that there's a list of politicians who are accused of harassment. And that list could be given to Andy Burnham. It's both bullying, it's inappropriate behaviours, it's sexual harassment in some cases. And we believe the list is somewhere between 30 and 60 names.

37:56Harriet Harman: We don't know who's the author. It's being reported as female Labour MPs and staff. None of the names on this list have been made public, but the Times has reported that it includes at least three senior ministers and two former ministers. And it's thought that this list is going to be handed to Andy Burnham's team in the coming days before he appoints his government so that he doesn't, because obviously he's been out of Westminster for a long time, so he doesn't appoint people that could be a potential risk in future. What do we think about this, Haria?

38:26Ruth Davidson: I think a lot of it's quite mysterious. I mean, starting off with the principle is that everybody who goes to work is entitled to do their work without being bullied or without being harassed and not being sexually harassed. That is not at all what should happen in a workplace and can make people's lives an absolute misery. And I think the government needs to set an example and parliament needs to set an example of being a decent workplace. But like with so many hierarchies, that when you've got people in positions of power, some abuse that power. And then the people further down the hierarchy feel that they daren't complain or they'll lose their job.

39:06Ruth Davidson: So you get this awful toxic situation where, quote, everybody knows that somebody has been rumoured to be doing sexual harassment, but there's no formal, efficient complaint. And then suddenly something really big comes out and everybody said, oh, well, that doesn't surprise us because we knew all along.

39:25Harriet Harman: Do you know, I completely get that whoever's putting this together is doing it from the very, very best of intentions. But when I read it, I just thought, do you know, this is why they hate us. This is why people hate politicians because it's kind of outrageous the idea that in any other workplace that had several thousand people working on a site, 650 of them that had a special status, that the only kind of sanction that you would get for being handsy or reducing someone to tears by shouting at them and behaving in a way that just would never be accepted in any other sort of order of work would be that somebody will tell the boss to not give you a promotion.

40:04Harriet Harman: That's it. It's not like you actually get disciplined. There's not proper support for the people who are being bullied or harassed by you. And I get that it's different when people are elected and not appointed. It's harder to do that. But surely we must be better than this. I mean, you've been in the Commons for more than 40 years, so you've seen a lot of changes. And I'm sure it's better than it was. But it just seems crap that this is the best that there is in terms of addressing this sort of behaviour.

40:29Ruth Davidson: I think what's happened is that the argument has moved forward in that people recognise that there is a problem with sexual harassment and it's totally unacceptable. But actually tackling it has proved more difficult. One of the proposals is that staffers and researchers shouldn't be employed by individual members of parliament, which makes them completely vulnerable to if they make a complaint, they could immediately lose their job, that they should be employed instead by the parliamentary authorities. And also there's a suggestion that there should be a review of how the Labour Party as a whole deals with this, because this is about councillors.

41:09Ruth Davidson: It's about MSPs and members of the Senate in Wales. It's about Labour Party members in local meetings, that there needs to be a drive to improve standards of conduct. And I think one of the things that Keir Starmer did is he took the whole question of anti-Semitism and said, this is not how we are going to be in this Labour Party. We are not going to tolerate anti-Semitism. And there will be consequences if you display that behaviour. And that went through right from MPs to councillors, right down to people in constituency parties and at ward level. And I think that what's been called for is a similar drive about how men in power treat women in the party.

41:53Harriet Harman: I'm sort of being slightly devil's advocate here, but is there a fairness question too? Because we know that politics is slightly different to other walks of life in that if you're expanding and on the up as a company, you can hire more people and increase it. There will only ever be 650 members of parliament. There's only ever so many people that sit in a cabinet. There's only ever so many ministers. They get extra wages and extra responsibilities. So for you to get one, somebody else has to not get one. Could there be a sense of score settling here, of just shoving somebody's name on the list saying, oh, I heard that they'd put their hands on somebody or that they'd raised their voice or that they'd behaved terribly?

42:33Harriet Harman: And nobody knows if they're on the list. Nobody can answer to that. There's no kind of ability to say, no, no, no, you don't understand. That's not true. I mean, it could just be a way of knocking out a rival for another job, right?

42:44Ruth Davidson: Well, I think that's what people often say when there's a move to improve standards of conduct. But currently, I think everybody would agree that the unfairness is the unfairness to the person who's subjected to sexual harassment or to bullying. And that's what needs to be tackled. and what you've got to do is have a situation where there is some sort of jeopardy that men in senior positions know they have to be careful. They have to not take risks with their behaviour and therefore I think that the risk has to go from the person who daren't complain because it's a risk to their job. The risk has to go to the person in the position of power that they have to be really careful and mindful about their behaviour and the impact it has on other people because the standards are going to be high.

43:33Harriet Harman: Is anyone ever taught when they become an MP how to run a private office? Because if you've never had a direct report report before, if you've never managed anyone before, is there anything to tell you what is or is not acceptable? I mean, I assume that most decent people know how to treat other people decently. But if somebody's never been taught...

43:51Ruth Davidson: There are induction processes. There didn't used to be now. And there is training, which is mandatory for new members of parliament. And I think the uptake now on it is much greater than it was. But I think, you know, at the end of the day, you're right, Ruth, is that the idea that people say, oh, I didn't realise that trying to grab her and kiss her in the back of the taxi was not OK. Men do realise it's not OK. They just think they can get away with it.

44:20Harriet Harman: I'm thinking less about sexual harassment because you bloody well should know that you can't take something without, you know, without that being consensual. It was more a case of the kind of the ones that come under being too tough a boss or being too angry or too, you know, that sort of side of things.

44:35Ruth Davidson: There is training now, but I think the problem is that there's insufficient accountability and that's what is continuously needing to be worked on. I mean, one of the things that I've put forward is that we should have a cross-party caucus, a women's caucus in the House of Commons, like they have in Canada and Australia, like they have in Holyrood in the Scottish Parliament. And I think if women work together a cross-party on this, that would be very good as well in terms of improving the standards.

45:03Harriet Harman: Well, there's a revolutionary thought. We'll see how things go. And as you say, Harriet, Monday at 2pm, we'll start hearing who the new cabinet is going to be. That's all from us today. We'll be back on Tuesday with our subscriber episode and then for our Friday episode as normal.

45:17Ruth Davidson: And we would love to hear from you. The burner phone is still in action. That's 07934 200 444. Email us at electoral dysfunction at sky.uk. And if you're an insider, capital I, do have a look at our brand new members forum. Goodbye.

45:35Harriet Harman: Goodbye.