Will women get a seat at Andy Burnham’s table?

0:02Harriet Harman: Sky News, the full story first.

0:12Harriet Harman: Do all of this or what? Or what are you going to do to Andy Burnham? Make us 50 % of the government or what? The women's PLP will not just be quietly disgruntled, they will cut up rough. he's also reopening pretty deep scars for the women who served in cabinet in that period and feel they were not respected in that environment hello and welcome to electoral dysfunction with me ruth davidson me harriet harman and me beth from sky sports beth rigby sky sports i wish it I wish it was. Thank you. Sky News, Beth, not Sky Sports, but I'm sure you could do that as well. Maybe one day. So I can't believe that the Prime Minister at his defence investment plan press conference broke the transfer news that I'm leaving Sky News and going to Sky Sports.

1:09I don't know how he found out. He's like a sleuth, that man. No, not really. I'm not really going to Sky Sports.

1:15Harriet Harman: I think he's got people to find out for him. I have to say, I don't know about you, Beth, but Sneaky, a secret part of me, would absolutely love to have traded news for sports when I was working as a journalist. Don't you think? It'd be great fun being a sports presenter. I openly lobby the end of Sky Sports every time I see him. I'm like, why shouldn't I interview footballers in the tunnel? Do you not think I'd do a good job? And now when he sees me at parties, he runs the other way. Honestly, Beth, I think you would brutalise footballers I don't think they would know what was coming Because you know how usually there's a set piece to these interviews Where they get to come out with all the kind of tropes It's like, so how do you think the match went?

1:56Harriet Harman: And they're like, oh yeah, so men against boys Really came into our own in the second half Subs made the difference, all of that You'd be like, but did they though? Did the subs make a difference? What do you think happened down that left-hand side? Do you really think that the flat-back four was the right way to start the match instead of the continental sweeper system. What about having a double pivot? Like I can just see you just like, they would be like pinned to the wall like this. And then they'd be like, we're not doing an interview with that woman again. But it was, what was funny about this?

2:23Well, number one, this does amuse me. So all my extensive political analysis in various content that is shipped around Sky News platforms and to social media and into the internet, nothing has been watched or consumed as much as the prime minister saying, Beth Rigby Sky Sports and everyone laughing, which amused me. But also what amused me more was that he just had a laugh about it. And what was actually quite nice about it was in the comments underneath these clips, people were saying it's actually really nice to see him a bit more relaxed because it was funny.

2:57Harriet Harman: I guess as well, because like England were playing that night and there was lots of like to and fro in the comments at Prime Minister's questions and stuff about the England match and stuff. You can kind of see how it happens. But I genuinely, one of my great, great joys, and I don't know if the sky gods can make this happen, when the England team return on the plane, I really, really want you to be standing at the little cordon at Heathrow going, are you going to resign, Mr Tuchel? Are you going to resign? But anyway, but actually he was very, it was very decent of the Prime Minister because afterwards he said to me, no discourtesy intended about calling you Beth from Sky Sports.

3:36and he was maybe worried that I would have been offended that he said I was from Sky Sports. But I thought that what it was, that when he looks at me, what he sees is Bukayo Saka, like a star striker or something, because, you know, from Arsenal. So I didn't mind at all. It was fun. It was fun. And I just think Keir Starmer this week's been a bit... Have you noticed this, Harriet? He's a bit uncut, isn't he? He's unleashed. I think a lot of people have commented to me very favourably on his little speech that he made outside Downing Street and saying they suddenly warmed to him when he was making a speech about when he was going.

4:12It must be a very turbulent period for him, but I'm hoping he's demob happy. And the most important thing is that he needs to not feel fuming with resentment, which he might justifiably feel, but he's got to really will the Andy Burnham regime to be a success.

4:35There is a lot going on and it might be the summer season, but things are not slowing down because we've got Andy Burnham about to become the Prime Minister in less than three weeks time. and he has got an ever-growing intray. And we're going to talk about that intray today because Starmer, in announcing his investment plan this week, has given his successor a little bit of a headache in what people are calling the fast black hole of his budget, which will come in the autumn.

5:09Harriet Harman: So all of this is to do with, and please, dear listener, do not switch off from this super sexy name. We're not like the Americans who like calling things like the No Child Left Behind Act or the like everybody gets to have free football and beer acts. No, no, no. We've called it the Defence Investment Plan or DIP. And every time I see DIP written, I kind of think of sort of one of the... A sherbet dip. Oh, no, I hadn't thought of a sherbet dip because we called them sherbet dip dabs rather than a sherbet dip. But we had a sherbet fountain and a sherbet dip dab. You're so exotic up in Scotland.

5:39Harriet Harman: Yeah, I mean, when it comes to stuff that's so sweet and sugar refined that it will rot your teeth, there is no nation on earth that knows more than us. So anyway, back to how we keep the country safe, because this is actually quite serious. What we've seen this week is that about a third of the funding for the dip has been deferred to the next budget. Put simply, here's Darmer, stood up, made a massive announcement, kicked the can down the road, told everyone it was Andy Burnham's problem, who has defined about£4.7 billion, you know, in October. And on to sexy names, because I think we should, you know, drill down on this because we want to, you know, acronym you all to death.

6:16The Defence Investment Plan or DIT is the product outcome of the Strategic Defence Review. And that was a review that assessed the threats to the UK. There were 63 recommendations in the Strategic Defence Review, which the government accepted all of. And then Defence Chiefs said, well, that's going to cost£28 billion in this parliament. And essentially what the Prime Minister did this week was he said, I found£15 billion in additional funding for Defence. Now, it was already controversial because Defence Chiefs were saying that they needed£28 billion. So there's a massive gap there. And then it was even more controversial because 4.7 billion of it, as Ruth was just saying, now needs to be found in the November budget.

7:05Now, we've got a great explainer here from Sky's data and economics editor and host of the excellent, and it really is excellent, Stuff Matters podcast, Ed Conway. Hi guys, Ed here, big fan. I've been kind of listening to you, I've been trying to work out what the Burnham campaign are going to think when they come in and finally look at the numbers. And I think what we got from the defence investment plan just a few days ago, I think it's a big deal because just break down the numbers, it's£15 billion, but only£10 and a bit billion of it is actually costed. the rest literally the rest of that so getting on for five billion pounds that has to be found somewhere and and for me the kind of the slightly unnerving thing is actually if you look at the years in which that black hole i mean it's one of those word terms but it is kind of a black hole to be honest with you if you look at the years where that black hole has to be found most of it falls in the first year and when i say the first year it's this year so this fiscal year there's 1.8 billion pounds that they need to find from somewhere to me that's kind of a big deal and if you think about rachel reeves coming in and bemoaning this inheritance that she was given from the tory government previously and you know there was there was a chunky black hole there well this time around maybe it's not quite as big but it's still they are coming into office and having to fill up this this hole and that is a tough job to do and it's doubly tough when you think okay there's there's the black hole we know about but there's this other black hole which is even bigger which is basically if you're going to get defense spending up from 2.7 percent of GDP which is kind of where it is after this big plan to 3.5 percent of GDP which is that's the target that everyone is aiming for um you're talking about I worked it out just now you're talking about three and a half p on the basic rate of income tax just if you wanted to do it through through tax rises.

9:00And, you know, that's, there's like crazy amounts of money. And so for me, the big black hole actually is kind of not the one that we're talking about right now. It's actually the one that they're facing in the future when, you know, how on earth are we going to actually get to that big target?

9:14Harriet Harman: I hope I made it a bit clearer. Thank you, Ed. If you want to hear more from Ed, and he is very, very good. His Stuff Matters podcast is brilliant. You get to get it all early and bonus content too, if you're one of our Sky News insiders. So if you sign up to that, you don't just get extra us, you also get extra Ed as well. What was interesting though, I think about what Starmer said in the House of Commons yesterday, bear with us, keep like hanging there, was that the government has that fiscal headroom. Do you remember we've talked about this, the buffer that the Chancellor has between what she's spending and her tax take in order to have a bit of a cushion if anything goes wrong.

9:56It's like I always think of it a bit fiscal headroom slash emergency fund. Anyway, she's got about£22 billion in fiscal headroom. And what the Prime Minister was saying in the Commons yesterday was, I don't know why everyone's going on about this shortfall. You can find it in the November budget by using some of the fiscal headroom. and that is what the fiscal headroom is for. And actually, I don't know if I've just drunk the Kool-Aid because he said I was Beth from Sky Sports, so suddenly I'm very inclined to be favourable about all things Keir Starmer does. But it didn't seem unreasonable to me, actually.

10:35I mean, if he and Rachel Reeves had remained imposed, I imagine that they would have used some of the headroom in the November budget to fund the defence plan because they're putting additional funding in outside the normal times that governments decide what the tax and spend is going to be. So they will have to find it from somewhere. They can do it from the fiscal headroom. They could do it from raising taxes. They can do it from cutting spending. So it seems to me that they had a plan to do it and they've just passed that plan to Burnham. Am I being a bit too benign there, Harriet? What do you think?

11:08I think that the problem for Andy Burnham is not caused by Keir Starmer. It's caused by Trump withdrawing funds from NATO and Putin being an ever-growing threat. So I think that there's broad agreement, which I'm sure includes Andy Burnham, that there needed to be this investment in defence and there's going to need to be a great deal more. And so I think that whoever was going to be the prime minister, this was going to be the challenge. And I think the timing imperative was not so much Keir Starmer leaving, but NATO and the need for the UK to go to the NATO meeting with a reassuring, nailed down commitment of increased spending and also the necessity to reassure America at this point.

11:56So I think that irrespective of who was the prime minister, there are going to be tough choices to be made on this about how to find the funds. I mean, Ruth, I checked out with the Burnham camp and it is true that when they discussed the defence investment plan with the Prime Minister ahead of its publication, no one mentioned that there was a matter of£5 billion to be found in the November budget. There have been reports that they were furious. I haven't had the vibe of fury. But what do you think? Do you think it is Keir Starmer kind of leaving him a kipper under the doormat or something, you know, when he walks in?

12:33Harriet Harman: I don't think that this was like when the Clinton administration left the White House and took all the W keys out of the keyboard just to annoy the George W. Bush incoming presidency. So I don't think it's Keir Starmer handing a shit sandwich to Andy Burnham to be mean and as a kick on the way out the door. I think it's just the reality of what's on the ground. The defence chiefs still say they don't have enough and they don't have enough by multiple, multiple billions. The Treasury still says it doesn't have enough money to fund it by multiple, multiple billions. So the kind of quandary, the horns of the dilemma that the next prime minister has is the same as this prime minister.

13:13Harriet Harman: There isn't enough money. The defence is creaking and it needs an upgrade. I think it's just the situation the country is in. And I think that the prime minister is desperate to do a bit of legacy shopping in his final few weeks and get something in place. You know, he needed to put something in place that would get us to the 3%. This doesn't. This really doesn't. But it's something that he's put on the books rather than leaving with it hanging over him. But, you know, it's all subject to change. If you're not the prime minister, you don't get to ram it through. I just wanted to say that if there is any temptation in Andy Burnham or any of those around him to feel disgruntled about the situation of what he did or didn't know about the financing of the strategic defence review, this defence investment plan, I think they should resist that temptation.

14:03Because you could argue it either way. For a start, Keir Starmer is absolutely right to have got the defence investment plan out before NATO. That is an external event. That's nothing to do with who our prime minister is here. That is NATO and the necessity for the UK to bring forward our spending plan. And then the normal course of events is you do the finances in the autumn. And it could equally be argued that it was right for Keir Starmer not to tie Andy Burnham's hands about where that money was going to be found from. Let the new prime minister make those important decisions. But it's only going to be the first step because Andy Burnham will not just have to finance this amount of spending, but he's going to have to find even more.

14:46So I think that it's really important for Andy Burnham and his team to focus on what the task is in hand and not say, but actually it would have been better if we would have known. Whether they did know or they didn't know, it wouldn't have made any difference because the facts remain exactly the same. So that is a fact which remains, which he needs to respond to. Harriet, I mean, the headiness of Labour MPs with the hope of an Andy Burnham administration and an Andy Burnham being this new fresh Labour Prime Minister. I mean, you kind of the hopes come crashing down to earth when you think about some of the dilemmas he is going to face when he comes into office?

15:29Because he's going to have all the same problems as Starmer, isn't he, when it comes to tax spend, everyone wanting more government funding, and it just not being there, and then having to take difficult decisions about funding, for example, more defence, and maybe cutting welfare, and trying to get that through the Labour benches. Good luck with that. Well, I think this is what's been the situation of the mood in the PLP. Absolute despair in the tanking opinion polls and the terrible council and Scottish and Welsh elections despair. Then real optimism and hope and relief at the Makerfield by-election, which was won so brilliantly by Andy Burnham.

16:11But now that's been replaced by a determination that this has got to be made to work, that it's difficult, but actually everybody's got to pull together and whatever the difficult circumstances, make it work this time?

16:26Harriet Harman: I think Kemi Badenow is doing some quite clever framing here, actually, because she's getting in very, very early and is trying to make this a two-choice solution, where she's saying, and she's laying the groundwork to say, look, you've got to pay for this. It needs to happen, has to happen. You're acknowledging it needs to happen. So you can either raise taxes or cut welfare. That's your options. And she's hammering that. And you'll see a lot of that, I think, over the next few weeks and months. And obviously, the Conservatives will say welfare needs cut because they know that welfare is a bit of a bruise for Labour after the kind of rebellion that was on it early on in this Parliament.

17:03Harriet Harman: It's a trap that's being laid because either raising taxes or not cutting welfare, it's all about same old Labour. They refuse to do, they refuse to do, they refuse to do. It also, just because of the things like pensions coming into that, the welfare budget is probably not going to be cut, it will grow. It may grow slower than it has previously been growing. But if you look at the kind of dynamics and the demographics of the country, it is very unlikely that you'll see welfare actually cut in this country, even if individual programmes have less money put into them or the amount that individual people get is less, just because of the way the population is ageing and things are happening.

17:38It was exactly what I was thinking yesterday when I was watching Prime Minister's Questions, because Kemi Badenot was being critical about defence funding and then And it was immediately on to welfare cuts. And it really is this area whereby Labour in a difficult position because there was the massive welfare rebellion. And really, that was the beginning of the end for Starmer when the benches realised that they could bounce him, despite having a massive majority into U-turns on such big decisions. you have a country that wants the welfare bill to be cut, a country I think running out of patience with people of a working age being out of work and claiming benefits and young people not having jobs, being in educational training.

18:27I think Andy Burnham can see very clearly that to win back the Labour heartlands which is where he is kind of coming from down to Westminster that he needs to sort out and he needs to begin to cut the welfare bill. The question is, and this is the big unknown, is can he get it past the benches in the Labour Party? And I think it's going to be a fascinating thing to see. Can Andy Burnham actually get the PLP to accept welfare cuts that the country probably will be supportive of, but Labour MPs will not be comfortable with? And Harriet, I guess that's my question to you because you will be, I'm sure, involved in conversations or listening to conversations that I imagine MPs are having about this at the moment.

19:15Well, I think that what Labour MPs want to see is the welfare bill falling because people, particularly young people, are getting into work. And I think that's what it's going to have to be based on, a real push on training and apprenticeships all around the country. I don't think there's any mood in the country, let alone in the parliamentary Labour Party, to just make people who are unable to work worse off and push them into poverty. But there is a real sense that we can't go on just accepting a situation that whole swathes of people of working age, including very many young people, are just somehow written off.

19:57So it's got to be based on principles, but it's definitely going to have to be turbocharged through. But having talked about the kind of real consensus within the Parliamentary Labour Party that this has got to be made to work, there's one area where actually there's a separate distinct determination, and that's in the Women's Parliamentary Labour Party. I mean, women are nearly half the parliamentary Labour Party, which is a massive breakthrough in women's representation since the last general election. And I think they arrived, many of them, having had stellar careers and made, you know, an amazing difference in their local areas outside of Parliament.

20:36they then come into Parliament full of hope and optimism of the role that they would play and just feeling whatever the truth of it, but the perception being that actually Keir Starmer's number 10 and his government was a boys club from which they were excluded. And I think the sense is now that although Andy Burnham has said he's very committed to equality for women in politics, and he's got a strong team of women around him and he's got a good record in Manchester of always including women and not having a boys club. Notwithstanding that, I think the women's PLP are not prepared to take it on trust anymore.

21:14They're going to want to see change so that women are not just in every room when decisions are made, but influential to make sure that the policy mistakes and the people mistakes that were made before, like the appointment of Peter Mandelson, are not made again. So I think that there's a new mood. It's no more playing nice by the women in the parliamentary Labour Party. They really want to see their place on equal terms now.

21:42Harriet Harman: But is it a real threat though? Because there was a piece that Kenny Badenow wrote in the Times saying that if the women's caucus of the PLP were really serious, they would have put somebody up to run against Andy Burnham in a leadership contest and made him nail his colours to the and all of these issues that they say they care about. I mean, how likely is it, given how conscious the Labour Party is about the idea that Keir Starmer was supposed to be no more chaos of keeping changing prime ministers and all the rest of it? Like, it's not really believable that the parliamentary Labour Party, male or female, is going to want to change Andy Burnham out anytime soon.

22:20Harriet Harman: So what's the stick? I mean, he can basically do what he likes and says, you know, rebel, don't rebel, whatever, but you're not getting rid of me because because then we'll look like the Tories or we'll look like Italy. I think the women in the PLP are regretful that once again, the Labour Party has got their next male leader. But I don't think anybody's talking about threatening to hoof Andy Burnham out if he doesn't ensure that women's demands are met. It's actually saying that the trust that there was when these women came into Parliament, that they would be able to play their part on equal terms of men, that trust has been burnt away.

22:55and it's not going to be regained just by a change of prime minister. It's got to be seen every single day working on the ground. The other thing that's interesting is there's quite a lively debate, I think, going on about the cabinet and who are going to be in the top jobs because you're going to have a male prime minister again. You've also got discussion about whether David Miliband comes back as the foreign secretary and then his brother, Ed Miliband, becomes the chancellor. I don't need to tell you, you'll have more Milibans than if that happened in the big four offices of state, PM, Chancellor, Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, then you'd have women, more Milibans than women in the top four.

23:37Harriet, how much of this is a problem slash issue genuinely for Andy Burnham having legitimacy in the party and amongst that very big cohort of female MPs? I mean, is this an actual discussion at the moment? Very much so. And I wouldn't call it a problem. I'd call it an opportunity for all the talent of the women to be included. But I think that they've put the chalk marks on the ground. They've put the line in the sand very, very clearly. They are insisting... What's the stick?

24:09Harriet Harman: Do all of this, or what? Or what are you going to do to Andy Burnham? Make us 50 % of the government, or what? Because the Prime Minister has to have the support, the confidence and cooperation of the PLP. and women are nearly half of the PLP. What they're doing is laying down very clearly that they want no men-only decision-making, that there has to be women in every room when decisions are being made, including in Downing Street. And that's not just a woman who's consigned to taking the minutes or bringing the tea in. This is women being in positions of influence, that when it comes to ministerial appointments across the board, that there's got to be half of those appointments have got to be women.

24:50And that when it comes to the top table, those cabinet positions, that balance of the cabinet has got to include senior women. Harriet, is there a world in which David Miliband can be the foreign secretary and Ed Miliband can be the chancellor? Or do you think that that is not going to fly? Well, you know, we discussed this before and we've got a very excellent woman foreign secretary, which is Yvette Cooper. But I mean, I'm sure David Miliband would be an excellent foreign secretary as well. And I'd already said that I thought on balance, a good decision would be for Ed Miliband to be the chancellor.

25:31It's just as well, I don't have to actually make all these things add up. But all I'm saying is that the whole question of ensuring that women are not just there, but they are influential and part of driving this government forward. I think that there is just an unwillingness to put up with the business as usual of men supporting, admiring, and colluding with other men and somehow women getting left on the outside. Andy Burnham is saying, that's not my style. I've never been like that. You know, I was kind of brought into politics by Tessa Jowell, as well as by David Blunkett. My team in Manchester has always included women as well as men as a matter of course.

26:13Well, that's the past. But what the women's PLP are saying is for the future and things get tougher. Power attracts a lot of men with sharp elbows trying to push women out the way. And the more power you've got, the more difficult it is to ensure that space is made for women and that that power is shared with women. So he's got to be proving every single day he's Prime Minister, that he's actually walking the talk and that women are included on equal terms. And if not, Ruth, the women's PLP will not just be quietly disgruntled, they will cut up rough. Okay, cut up rough. Oh, interesting. Can I just say also, as we've been doing this, someone has, a senior woman in the party, unprompted, has messaged me about what we've just been talking about.

26:59I just want to read, Andy Burnham may be excited about the prospects of reuniting his old pals from 2007 Cabinet. That's James Purnell, the Chief of Staff, Douglas Alexander, who is the Scottish Secretary at the moment, and the Miliband bros, not so much getting the band back together as reuniting the old football team, but in the process he's also reopening pretty deep scars for the women who served in Cabinet in that period and feel they were not respected in that environment. Margaret Beckett was dumped. Harriet Harman, Harriet, you've got a name check here, was denied the Deputy Prime Minister role.

27:37Ruth Kelly was demoted. Yvette Cooper was denied a Cabinet role. Jackie Smith and Hazel Blizz made to carry the can for the expenses scandal, all which culminated in Caroline Flint's famous attack on that under Brown. There was a two-tier Cabinet with women treated as window dressing. They go on. Now, I suspect that Andy will try and win praise by appointing the most female cabinet in history, which frankly will not be difficult. Plus, they'll likely restore a female deputy prime minister in Lucy Powell. But if he ends up replacing two of the women in big offices of state with two brothers and essentially running the inner circle of government as an old Powell's reunion, then this could begin to bite him with the women in the party and with women more generally.

28:21That just exemplifies the mood I'm talking about. There is scar tissue here. And this is now put firmly, the ball is in Andy Burnham's court. Oh, that probably I shouldn't be using a football analogy since that's a sore point. Court's tennis, you're fine. You know, it's very much down to Andy Burnham that this is not just something that can be a marginal issue. What you've seen in that is you've seen generations of resentment. You've seen the older generation with the past resentments of what happened when we were last in government. but there is a new generation of resentment amongst the women who came in in 2024, who've done amazing things outside Parliament, then came into Parliament and felt they faced arrested development.

29:03They just simply haven't been able to be included. It's going to be a central issue because the women are going to make it so. And that will be for the good of this government. I will be interested to see, Harriet, if the women's PLP is the mouse that roars or

29:17Harriet Harman: whatever in terms of it. The lion that roars. The lion that roars, yes.

29:27Hi, 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 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.

30:13Terms 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.

30:32Harriet Harman: But I want to circle back to welfare because I think that this is going to be one of the kind of defining areas here, not least because of that big rebellion that happened early on for Keir Starmer and how that framed so many things that came after. But the point that you were making about the PLP having to have a story to tell and having to make decisions on welfare that you were making, Beth, I mean, I think that's one thing that Burnham and his team will be really aware of and do better and be able to talk about that kind of intergenerational fairness, how hard it is for young people, the Milburn report.

31:06Harriet Harman: But I think that there is a problem because every Labour prime minister comes in talking about youth opportunity, youth unemployment. And yet we have seen so many times that it just doesn't work. You've got to supercharge the economy. You've got to make sure that there's more jobs on offer. You've got to make sure that things like national insurance contributions aren't prohibitive to people taking on staff, particularly at the lower end, entry level jobs. You're doing all of that against a backdrop where AI technology, it is being assumed will do away with a lot of roles that currently exist altogether.

31:37Harriet Harman: So you're going to have to find other avenues of employment. The country is at a point where poll after poll after poll, the wish of the majority of people is that the welfare bill is reduced. I mean, it's a heck of a job. Like, it's just, you know, he would be forgiven for being daunted is all I'm saying. That is going to have to be Andy Burnham's determination. And he knows it's not going to be easy. But I think that the Parliamentary Labour Party will go with him when he tells the story and sets out the picture of the direction of travel being about not making people worse off, not punishing them even more for not being able to be in a position to be able to work, but actually how they're going to be able to be got into work.

32:22Harriet, how helpful is it for Andy Burnham that some of those that organise the welfare rebellion that did for Keir Starmer or was the kind of undoing of the Starmer administration and now some of his close allies, i.e. do you think it will be easier for Burnham because he has more goodwill on the benches and some of those that were making life difficult for Starmer over welfare cuts will fall into line for Burnham? Or do you think it's more fundamental that actually he has to do the reforms properly in order to get the support? I think that he will know that he's got to tell the story of the reforms and do the reforms properly and differently from the way Keir Starmer approached it.

33:10There'll also be, as you say, Beth, a number of the key people who led the revolt are absolutely part of Andy Burnham's team. but also a general view in the Parliamentary Labour Party that there's only so much disruption that the country will be prepared to take in the party of government. And this time, they've got to make it work. We're on our second prime minister since only 2024. We cannot move to our third. And therefore, this time, there's got to be a rallying round of the prime minister and helping him deliver rather than just pulling him down.

33:45Harriet Harman: But before we go, there's a quick question that's come in from Sean, who's messaged the Burner phone following Burnham's speech on Monday. And Sean says, hi, ladies, Andy Burnham wants to move more power to mayors and take it away from Westminster, a plan that I agree with. My question to you is, should he slim down his cabinet meeting attendees, such as the culture and sports secretary, who really doesn't need to attend a cabinet meeting every week, and instead of the most important secretaries of state, just as Defence, Health and Chancellor along with mayors so they get face to face every week.

34:18Harriet Harman: This plan will only work if he brings all mayors into the tent. So he's asking do you want to change cabinet to go from how it is at the moment to doing smaller in terms of ministers and have big ministries alongside the metro mayors that can come in that operate in that area. On the one hand, Sean, that is a really interesting idea. The reason that you have a cabinet and you have all the departments represented is that actually government has to be run by cabinet collective responsibility. A prime minister has to kind of run his decisions and get agreement from the whole team, which is part of the reason why the whole team get together in cabinet.

35:02And there already are structures whereby you have sort of sub-cabinets to make decisions around certain areas. But I think what you're talking about is really interesting in terms of how you bring the mayors into decision making. And I think that, I don't think you have to necessarily do away with cabinet, but I do think that you're right in the sense that if you really want to properly devolve powers out of Westminster around the country, and Ed Conway, our beautiful, wonderful Ed Conway, did a really fascinating explainer looking at different countries in Europe and the way in which tax was taken by central government versus regions and the way in which the capital city, how it stood in terms of wealth compared with other cities.

35:52In both cases, the UK had the highest tax concentration from Westminster, i.e. parts of the country did not have tax-raising powers. So it's always handouts from government. And then when it came to cities, it was fascinating because London was by far the biggest and most successful and wealthiest city. And then the second cities were very far down the chart. Whereas in other countries such as France or Germany, there was much more wealth spread across other cities. And it really speaks to the fact of the structural imbalances in our country. So I do think that his ideas about devolving tax raising, potentially decision making, to mayoralties and big cities and councils, I think is the right thing to do for the country.

36:42The other thing I'd say about this, which is really interesting, which we can get a bit more into, there is quite a live discussion around whether the Treasury should be split up. And this is something that Louise Hague, who's going to be, as I said, one of the key people in the Burnham administration, has been talking about, which is you split the Treasury so that the growth element of the Treasury Department, which is actually trying to get economic growth, is split off from the bookmaking element, the element of the Treasury that's doing the accounts and trying to make the public finances add up.

37:16Because there's an argument that it's too powerful to have all these abilities and responsibilities into one department. But also the accounting end of the Treasury is stifling the dynamism of the Treasury and the growth of the Treasury. So split these up. So I think, Sean, that's a really convoluted way to say, I don't know, actually. But I think that Sean has picked up a really important point here, which is that Andy Burnham has got to have the machinery of government that is going to drive through the changes he wants. And one of the big changes he wants, as well as economic growth, is he wants it to be in every part of the country.

37:54And he wants decision making to be made near where people live in every part of the country. And Sean's picked up the point about mayors. And that reminded me, when we got in in 1997, John Prescott used to chair a cabinet committee, which included the leaders of local councils and the devolved administrations. Well, they weren't devolved then, but it was Scotland and Wales. Perhaps Andy Burnham will need to chair a committee which includes the mayors, and they were in the front row of his speech in Manchester earlier this week, which include the mayors, includes the council leaders, includes the first ministers of Scotland and Wales, as well as the key central government ministers, because that machinery has got to start working straight away.

38:40What do you think, Ruth? You must have a view on this. I don't even know why you asked me. How dare you? I'm like, I don't know. What do you think?

38:47Harriet Harman: There was a really interesting that happened just by dint of circumstance between 2010 and 2015 when the coalition government was there. So they obviously had to have cabinet meetings, which was a mixture of Tories and Lib Dems. But each of the parties had to have a space to talk about the politics of stuff without the other ones knowing or hearing. David Cameron started what he called political cabinet that met on a different day. And it had everybody that was a cabinet minister. Plus there was a standing invitation for Boris as London mayor, me as the leader in Scotland, and Andrew R. Davis as the leader in Wales.

39:20Harriet Harman: And I used to pop down quite a bit for that because it was very useful for me to be able to have contact with all of the departments that were reserved. So there were areas that affected, directly affected Scotland. Needless to say, not a single one that I went to had Boris turned up for, despite the fact he was just down the road. I don't know if he went to the ones I wasn't at. But yeah, it always struck me that doing the official work of business around the cabinet table, but having that space within the party to basically do the politics and fly the kites was quite a good way of doing it. I mean, but it's always been the case that there has been both cabinet meetings in the cabinet room, round the cabinet table and political cabinets.

40:04It is a good point that politics is very, very difficult at the moment and therefore having a political cabinet on a more regular basis is important. But one of the key things that Andy Burnham has talked about is talked about including people from other political parties and working more broadly. I mean, are we going to see him working on a properly cross-party basis, getting in other parties to have meetings round the cabinet table and doing difficult things on a cross-party basis. I think if he did that, then it gives the opportunity of the opposition parties to actually play a role in the future of their country.

40:45And I think that if he did that, he might have more support for us to face as a country the difficult decisions that lay ahead.

40:59That's all we've got time for, I'm afraid, but we are going to be back on Tuesday and that episode is going to be for our members. So if you would like to join us for that, and we would love to have you, you can do so by subscribing to Sky News Insider. And the details are in the episode description.

41:16Harriet Harman: Your subscription also gives you access to our members forum and some fantastic bonus content from some of our sister podcasts, which includes Trump 100, which this week takes a look at what life is like inside the White House and why Trump can't help but get involved in UK politics. So do check them out. I have to say, I have a binge listen to Ed Conway's Stuff Matters, and there's a whole episode on bananas. And did you know, I've got to tell you this just as a teaser, did you know that when bananas are unripe and green yeah you can snap them in half like a cucumber and they smell of cucumber did you know that no wild isn't it so if you want to know if you also want to be as knowledgeable as me on random facts that you didn't think you needed to know but when you do know them you can't unknow them nor do you want to unknow them Listen to Stuff Matters by Ed Conway.

42:11And he hasn't paid me for that. I genuinely, I actually saw him in the office yesterday. I went, cucumbers, bananas. And he just laughed at me. But anyway. My goodness, how much we love talking to each other. But actually, we also love hearing from you. So send us your thoughts, ideas, questions and anything else, either on our brand new members forum, which you have access to if you're an insider, or to the burner phone, which is 07934 2444. or to the email electoral dysfunction at sky.uk. Goodbye. Goodbye.