156. Defence Secretary, John Healey: Is Britain Ready For War?

33:51Tell us a little bit about this story, about how defence works with the Treasury and what you, in an ideal world, could work better about that. Of course, money is an issue, but the Treasury isn't. So Rachel and I, in opposition, worked very closely on developing a defence industrial strategy, on the recognition and case for investment in defence, driving economic growth, recognising, for instance, that 70 % of defence jobs are outside London and the South East, recognising that defence jobs are, on average, paid at least£10 ,000 to£15 ,000 a year more than the average manufacturing jobs, And that defence with the military offers over 20 ,000 apprenticeships, new apprenticeships every year.

34:45So a recognition from the Treasury, which we didn't have before, about the importance of place around the UK. And you'll see that as a not just as a characteristic of how I approach defence, but Rachel approaches and this government approaches the economic investment. The second thing was that we worked really closely on the strategic defence review that Keir Starmer launched within three weeks of the election back in July. Not keeping the Treasury at arm's length, but hardwiring a senior Treasury person right at the heart of that review. We worked closely together on being able to prepare the ground for Keir in February to make that historic commitment in many ways, the commitment to the largest increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War, very soon after Trump was elected.

35:41an act that his defense secretary pete hegseth said to me when i phoned him to let him know we were doing it as a great act of leadership it was the first european country at that time demonstrating that we were ready to meet the u.s challenge to step up on european security step up on defense spending and so we will hit 2.5 2.6 percent of gdp on defense by 2027 that's three years earlier than anyone expected. And certainly the Tory plans will, we've got an ambition of 3 % in the next parliament. And we've been central to that NATO commitment in June at the Hague Summit of 5 % on national security as a whole by 2035, recognising quite simply, we are in a new era of threat.

36:31There has to be a new era for defence. And politically, and for the sense of fairness for the country, we have to demonstrate that we can spend not just more, but we can spend better, that it will be good value for money. And not just give people a sense that this is going to make the country more secure, but it can bring a dividend and it will bring a dividend in the jobs, the support for business, the rebuilding of our British industry and innovation base right across the UK. Do you feel that the United States is as reliable an ally as it was during Thatcher, Reagan, Blair, Clinton? I do. Keir Starmer does.

37:16Certainly reliable, perhaps less predictable. But when Keir Starmer first went to the White House, President Trump said to him, very clearly. My commitment to NATO is total. And certainly in the many discussions and meetings I've had with my opposite number, Pete Hegseth, I know the value that he places in the intelligence, the defense, the cyber, the special forces operations that our two countries do together in a way that no other countries do. But the Americans are right. They're right to right to challenge the UK, the right to challenge the European nations to step up, to fund more, to do more within NATO.

38:02And look, I've been arguing for nearly five years that the European countries in NATO have to do more of the heavy lifting. And that's why we have a NATO first policy now at the heart of our defence plans. That and the fact that in this era of increasing threats, our strategic strength and security lies with closer allies. when you did make the move in terms of increasing the share of gdp on defense it was part paid for by cutting back on share of gdp on international aid and development which was a breach of the manifesto was that not a time actually where you could have broken a different line in the manifesto which is tax basically to say we are in a completely different era putin ukraine trump's re-election the need for greater defense spending we're actually going to raise tax was that even a discussion at the time well there are always there are always options in government um they're never easy choices and decisions and that particularly for a labor party in government with a sort of record of the previous labor government on millennium development goals on writing off the debt of most impoverished countries on um the the setting of the aid target and raising it really hard to do.

39:22But that was a switch that recognized essentially that hard power is more important than soft power, that you can't deal with Putin's drones, with international aid projects. And in order to make that commitment of increasing funding by 2027, we had to make that decision. That's what we've chosen to do. John, one big choice that you have to make with all this extra money is in blunt terms, how much of that money you give to the US buying their defense equipment and how much of it is focused on European cooperation. It's a tough one, right? I mean, Trump makes no secret of the fact that one of the reasons he wants you spending 5 % of GDP on defense is he thinks you're going to be buying more and more American equipment.

40:06and there is a sense that quite a lot of the money is going to the US. Now, of course, they'll always say you can have a little bit of it. We'll make the Chinooks, but you can repaint them instead of you having the medium lift capacity here in the UK. Or we've got a fancy American firm that can do data and cyber and all this kind of stuff and go with us rather than with the European equipment. When are we going to begin seeing a bit of balancing away from the US, more money going into European manufacturers, UK manufacturers, so that we don't end up, God forbid, in four years' time, eight years' time, too dependent on a US that may not be as reliable in the future as you think they are today?

40:46We're already seeing that. There's been an increase in our first year of defence contracts into the UK as opposed to the US. And I've been arguing that for four or five years now, that we should direct and look to direct British taxpayers' money first to British jobs, British businesses and British innovation. And that's what we're doing. So because of the commitment that not just we're making to increasing defence spending, but other European countries are, there's a desire in the US, of course there is, to see their industry and their firms do well. But there's also a recognition, and you will hear Pete Hegseth arguing this.

41:26you will actually hear the senior military and you'll hear Trump say this as well, is that we have to build up the European industry base, not just the strength of our forces. There are things that we can do. So the link up, we talked about the 10 billion pound deal that we struck with Norway to build five new warships for them. Part of that will be stepping up the Norwegian contribution to that. We'll build together and we'll build better. We're doing the same with the next generation of new combat aircraft with Italy and with Japan. We're doing some really important work on submarines with the US and with Australia.

42:11So with the really big projects, you have to collaborate. But gone are the days when you'll have a British government signing contracts with American firms and not concerned to make sure that the jobs, the economic benefit and some of the innovation and the intellectual property is here in the UK. because one lesson that we have to take from Ukraine is that when a country is under threat or forced to fight, then its forces are only as strong as the industry that stands behind them. You mentioned Australia there, and we've got a lot of listeners in Australia. And obviously AUKUS, this three-country, this huge defence deal between the US, the UK and Australia, very, very important to the Australians.

43:03and we spoke, Rory and I spoke recently to a couple of Australian politicians who were very clear that they think AUKUS is on track and it's kind of, it's a strong agreement and it's not going to be broken. But I don't quite understand why the Americans are still kind of having this review and they've got this guy in charge of it, Colby, who strikes me as being right out there on the kind of MAGA end of the Department of War as it now is. Do you have any worries about the way that the Americans are handling AUKUS? albanese thus far apart from a selfie where they look like they're in mud and two swords i mean he's yet to have a proper meeting with trump yeah no i don't um the discussions i've had the knowledge of the program the work that we're doing on elements of orcas directly with the us as well as with the with australia give me the confidence that this is a hardwired and recognized not just as a program to develop some world-beating leading military capabilities.

44:01It's a big strategic link up between three natural allies. The other reason I'm not really concerned is that we came into government and we did a review of AUKUS. I commissioned that. The prime minister reported to me and the prime minister. New government in the US, of course, they want to take stock of it. and I'm looking to report the confirmation of that as a way of sort of rebooting AUKUS for the future. And then you'll have essentially three recently elected new governments looking for a fresh commitment to that AUKUS programme, perhaps developing it in areas where it isn't being developed and driven at the moment.

44:43And it will reinforce that three-nation commitment that straddles the security of the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific and demonstrates exactly why you can't divide the security of one from the other. Ukraine and Gaza. So Ukraine, Trump has kind of been blowing hot and cold and he changes line from time to time. The latest line is that Ukraine can get the whole territory back. First of all, do you agree with that? And secondly, on Gaza, how does it end? Two massive questions. So on Ukraine, it's too easy to say, look, Putin's winning. Yes, he's making some, gaining some ground. But at the rate that he's been winning Ukraine territory this year, it would take him another four years to take the whole of the Donbass.

45:36And this is a war in the end, which he thought he'd win in a week. Three and a half years on, he's lost more than a million men. He's lost more than 10 ,000 tanks and armoured vehicles. Uh, he has produced a NATO, which is now bigger. It's now more unified and it's got a big commitment to being better resourced over the next 10 years. So this is Putin likes to talk as if he's strong, uh, but he's actually in weaker than he was before NATO stronger than it was before. And Ukraine, having been out there two or three weeks ago is just as determined and defiant as it was three and a half years ago.

46:20And that isn't just the huge courage of their military, it's the determination of their civilian population. I visited a drone factory, which had been bombed five times this year. And those workers still come to work every morning, because they know the drones they're making are what their fathers, their sons, their uncles need on the front line to fight back Putin. So I think Trump is recognizing that. I think he's recognizing really the determination of the Ukrainians and the relative weakness of Putin. You look at the fact that 40 % of his government spending now is going on the military. What's needed now is to turn the screw on Putin economically to continue to make sure that Ukraine has the military support to keep fighting, which is why that we've stepped in as the UK and I convene and co-chair with the Germans, the Ukraine contact group, which is 50 nations supporting Ukraine, standing with Ukraine.

47:29But we've also got to prepare for that point of peace because peace is possible. and that's why we've also stepped in and KIA has been an important force in this alongside the French to prepare for the coalition of the willing so that we can help secure that peace for the long term when we can get an end to the fighting. Just hypothetically, tell us a bit about what it's like being a government, what the problems are, what the public doesn't see, right? So let's say hypothetically you got out of bed in the morning and thought actually we're in a bit of trouble. Our Type 23 fleet is knackered. We don't have any surface-to-air missiles.

48:04We can barely deploy a battle group, let alone a brigade. And if we needed to go to war in 12 months' time, we'd be truly royally screwed. And you wanted to really push ahead with it. You really wanted to say to your department, where the hell are these surface-to-air missiles? Where are the artillery? What are the things that get in the way of it happening as quickly as the public would like? We have a defense system that has been used to working too slowly, that has overcomplicated every decision, that has not had people who are clearly identified as responsible, ready to get a grip and answering for whether or not things are done.

48:43that isn't just a defense problem it's a government problem as well but part of the purpose of the reform that i'm driving that's the deepest reform of defense for over 50 years that nobody sees or reads about doesn't get in on the front pages no photo opportunities but unless we do this we won't be able to put the most innovative new tech in the hands of our frontline warfighters We won't be able to get on contract with new ships or planes within two years instead of six. We won't be able to harness an upgrade, the new radar systems or weapon systems as we need to. So that's why I've set target times for getting on contract.

49:28It's why I've done a deep reform of defense. So we have now, for instance, we've got 17 organizations down to four lead areas. We've got 11 finance teams down to four. We've got a single invest budget now instead of multiple areas in defense making their own investment decisions. And you've got a military strategic headquarters for the first time with the chief of the defense staff commanding the service chiefs. So you get a stronger strategic center. You're able to make the decisions quicker. And look, we can do it. We proved we can do it to support Ukraine. We've got this extraordinary task force that has demonstrated its capacity, not just at scale, to procure and develop what Ukraine needs, but can do it quickly.

50:19John I was watching a documentary on German telly the other day which was about Finland and the role of reservists and the extent to which you get the sense of a kind of societal understanding of the threat strikes me that despite all the things that you and Keir say about the threat that Putin poses and to our way of life to our stability that we're still nowhere near that sense in the uk that he really is a threat even though we see what happens in ukraine people don't necessarily feel it here do you think we need to step up on that front as well yes we do and what does that involve and part of the big strategic defense review that we we published in june set that out uh it's also a an observation from ukraine it isn't just a country is stronger its forces are better better ready to sustain a fight if the industry and the innovation base in the country can support them but it's also that you require that as they do in in ukraine requires the whole society to do that finland's on the russian border we're somewhat remote we've been used to years in which we've been able to help ourselves to the post-Cold War peace dividend, to be able to outsource any sense of defending the country to the armed forces.

51:45But we have to take our homeland defense more seriously. And this is part of the NATO plans. We have to make our forces more ready to fight because that's the way that you deter aggression in the future. And we have to be ready to call out and explain to people just what a threat and just what Russia is doing. That's why, for instance, recently when we had one of their spy ships in our waters, I made sure that we didn't just keep that quiet and did what we needed to shadow them, make sure they got up to no harm while they were in our waters. But actually we exposed it so people can see some of what they're doing.

52:26But I mean, I was shocked when I became defence minister by the... A scale of it.

53:01is going well in defense in Scandinavia, the Baltics, Poland? I think we can learn from Sweden as well as Finland that sense that society is stronger and more secure if it's resilient in basic ways, that we're all more attuned to cyber threats, that we recognize and support more strongly the role that the forces play. for those those countries on that eastern flank they have a an acute and immediate and understandable sense of threat but they are also and i think we learn from this as well that they want to work with allies like us we've made a big commitment to estonia for instance so we We have hardwired about a thousand of our UK troops into that Estonian defense and planning.

53:58We're part of developing some extraordinary new technology that we're putting in the hands of the Estonian and the UK fighters. That, for instance, to come back to your previous discussion, we've developed and put on contract and delivered into the hands of our forces there within six months. and it is already allowing the sort of black rats, the 4th Light Infantry Brigade that's out there, to be able to see 10 times further into Russia and to be able to react 10 times faster so we can work the Estonians together. And I think we learn that. We learn that we're stronger together, we stand together, and that's the philosophy of NATO.

54:40One thing that can be a bit of a risk in Britain is that we can get a little bit complacent. we can be very good at taking quite limited resources and then spinning and saying we're doing all these amazing things. And so let's say again, hypothetically, I'm not saying this is the case, but let's say the Estonians said to you informally, listen, it's great what you're doing, but the truth of the matter is there's problems here. You don't always have the missiles when we're expecting them to. We can't really rely on you for the artillery. The Germans are spending hundreds of millions building barracks you're saying you're going to deploy from britain when you turn up and you begin to sense i don't know it might not be that might be some other part of the world where you begin to sense actually we're a little bit complacent people civil servants military are spinning that we're doing all these great things and you sense actually the substance isn't quite there how do you as a secretary say grip that how do you drive it through how do you challenge the system look it is a big challenge you had ben wallace on your program um a few months ago.

55:39I've got a lot of time for him and a lot of respect and the strength of the UK response and leadership on Ukraine in large part was down to Ben Wallace. The cross-party support was absolute from Keir Starmer and me from day one. And we have that from the conservatives now, and it's a really important part of it. But he also said, look, you know, in 14 years, We hollowed out and underfunded the forces. There is a huge challenge now to make our forces more fit for war fighting, because that's the way that we turn the increasing Russian aggression and other adversaries. But we don't do it alone. And so it doesn't require every country within NATO to be able to do all things.

56:25and that's for me the real importance what's the what's the special contribution and leadership that britain can bring so part of that is about how well equipped um and what our forces can do but it's also that recovering that sense of leadership that britain britain can offer so for instance on ukraine um we are leading the coalition of the willing preparation for the point at which the fighting stops. We are leading the contact group of nations that is stepping up support for Ukraine. But we've also, behind the scenes, we've also been setting up and leading funds, the International Fund for Ukraine.

57:07It's just top two billion pounds, 10 countries. And the UK is procuring and delivering through what we call a task force kindred for the contributions for other countries. So we've been responsible for coordinating the biggest movement of munitions across Europe since the end of this Cold War. We've been responsible for procuring for Ukraine the contribution from other countries because we can do it better and because other countries will look to us to lead. Final contribution I'm handing over to Alistair to conclude, but just to return to my question, in those moments, that's good news, but in those moments where you sense we're being a bit complacent and you're getting a bit of spin that, well, yes, Minister, we may not have many troops on the ground and we may not have much kit, but the fact is we're providing thought leadership, strategy, Britain, which some of our European allies might occasionally think, hmm, how do you challenge it?

58:00How do you challenge complacency? You can't just do it by what you say and what you, thought leadership. No, that's why we're increasing defence spending by a record amount since the end of the Cold War. That's why we're putting in place some very profound reforms within defence. and it's why we're stepping up the alliances that we're we're rebuilding our alliances in a way that we'd lost sight of in britain until 15 months ago and that was what we said we would do we said that britain would again play a leading role in nato we said we would reset relations with key european allies relations that were um broken and sometimes willfully willfully tested during that brexit period gaza um the idf do you look at what they're doing and think that is not good we should not fight a war like this 100 um the new offensive in gaza um utterly utterly out of order harsh agonizing to see its impact and we've condemned that we've not just called it out in public but I've had the hard conversations with in private with Israeli defense ministers Kiyah has with the president of Israel so we've been working to try and say this is got to stop we still sell them stuff though well we've suspended the export licenses on 30 items which the IDF there was a risk the IDF might use to breach international humanitarian law in Gaza we've refused since then another 46 licenses we've paused the the military training places for IDF personnel in the UK we didn't issue any invitations to the Israeli government to the big London International Defence Trade Fair that was the O2 in earlier this month.

1:00:12So we've taken steps, not just to say to the Israelis, but to demonstrate to the Israelis that there are consequences. And part of, and of course, we've taken the step now to say that we will recognise Palestine and that has brought other countries along with us. It has helped to shift an Arab opinion. So you've got Arab countries now, like us, condemning Hamas and confirming that Hamas can have no role in any future for Palestine. So we're doing what we can, and what we can do is much stronger if we do it alongside allies. And so that's why you've seen Kier the whole time working with other European countries, with Macron, with Mertz.

1:00:57We've seen him working with Albanese. We've seen him working also with Carney from Canada in recent weeks. My final question. It is startling to see, you look at the polls and you look at Keir's ratings in particular, make the case for Keir as Prime Minister and as Prime Minister for the long term to lead Labour into the next election and how you win it. Look, this is a man who's prime minister at a time of unprecedented threat, who recognizes just how deep the problems in this country are and how tough the job to fix them is. he is someone who has never done things the easy way he won't walk around problems and he knows that his task now is to lead a government that can restore that sense of confidence and trust in government that can restore that sense of pride in the country and if you want the biggest picture I think this is at a period where he recognizes as I do that the future of Britain, the future of European security will be determined over the next three to four years.

1:02:11And that's why what's so important about the leadership he's offered on the international side with Coalition of the Willing, the new agreements that we've struck with the European Union, the trade deals that we've been able to land. This is once again, Britain becoming democracy's most reliable ally this is once again britain being able to play a leading role in europe because make no mistake we have to settle the land war in ukraine we have to be able to deter increasing russian aggression and we have to be able to strengthen that collective nato-led deterrence in order to keep britain safe very good uh i heard a story about you As you said earlier, you're not one of those politicians who likes wearing your heart on your sleeve.

1:03:03You don't like talking about yourself. You like to just get on to do the job. But digging around a bit before doing this interview, somebody told me a story that was so ridiculous, I don't know if I can believe it. But it was when you were, I think, working for the mental health campaigns and you got a sort of parliamentary success, you got the law changed. And you celebrated by sailing across the Atlantic. Is that true? Yes. And then what happened, John? Hold on. Are you a sailor? No. Never sailed in my life. So what are you doing? You're sailing across the Atlantic? I helped. I drafted and I organized a campaign to win a piece of legislation that included rights for people being discharged from the big mental hospitals we had in the 80s.

1:03:53Because you'd worked in a psychiatric hospital. Because I'd worked with those people that were being turfed out under the Thatcher government. into care in the community, so-called, and there was not even an assessment of their needs before they were discharged. That legislation changed that. So, look, job done. Perhaps it was 30 years before its time, you know, career break. I thought, I want to sail the Atlantic. The problem was I didn't really, I'd never sailed. I didn't research it properly. I got a one-way ticket to the Canary Islands and found I was there two months before any of the boats arrived to make the crossing.

1:04:32What sort of boat was it? Well, it was a sailing boat. I managed to talk my way onto a sailing boat that was 47 foot. How many people? There were four others. How did it work out? How did your trip go? We got across. It was an absolute trip of a lifetime. It was coming back that was worse. That was on a 30-foot boat with one other, no engine. What happened on the way back? And that was, we had very bad weather. We got driven off course. We were 43 days at sea. We were reported missing to the Lloyds. And we ran out of gas. We ran out of fresh food. Yeah, we were in pretty bad shape when we got to the Azores, but we got there.

1:05:12You got as far as the Azores? Yeah. And then got flown back? And then I left the boat there and he got it repaired. Blimey. I mean, you know, what does that tell you? Well, in the end, you know, when you're in the middle. It tells you that you couldn't drown. When you're in the middle of the Atlantic and you're hit by a Force 9 storm, the waves, you're being driven off course by waves that are bigger than the boat. You survive that. You sort of think, well, I'm going to survive anything. Yeah, Backbench Rebellion. Who needs a backbench? 14 years of opposition. I thought this guy was winding me up, but there you go.

1:05:45True. I never talk about that. Amazing. It's just something in the past. Well, John, thank you for your time. Thank you. Have a great day. Thanks very much.

1:05:58so also what did you think well hi john he's he's uh i mean he's a serious guy and you had i had a sense of somebody who's really on top of his job uh which is unusual i think it's really good for a capital but it's still on top of their job you used to say that's the bare minimum we can expect yeah so no what do you think no i think he's i think he's uh incredibly charming he's very interesting. I mean, he was basically from the early 80s to 97, a communications and campaigns professional, advocacy professional. But his style is quite sort of gentle, measured, understated. You did very well to winkle out that amazing story.

1:06:41I mean, listeners will have picked up on the undercurrents of that, but that is complete terrifying. I mean, 43 days stuck in the Atlantic before the days of GPS, driven four days by the wind. Having never sailed before. Yeah. And absolutely certain they're going to die, trying to take sextant readings in a ship that's crashing around in waves largely in a ship. I mean, he doesn't strike you as that sort of big adventurer. He's steady as you go. He's like, you know, it was interesting, for example, when we had Keir Starmer's reshuffler, he was moving every left, right and center. I don't think he gave any thought to moving John Healy because he just feels like he's a round peg in a round hole.

1:07:19And look, you talk to military people and I talk to military people. You get the sense that even though they're maybe frustrated about the state of British defences and the role of defence within the political debate, most of the people you talk to will say he's doing a good job. Well, absolutely. And there's something quite interesting about both him and actually Ben Wallace, who we interviewed on leading, which is both of them had relatively slow careers. they weren't the kind of high-flying, fast people. I mean, in the first 13 years of Labour government, as you say, didn't get into the Cabinet, whereas we've interviewed people on this show who were in the Cabinet within two, three years.

1:07:59And a bit like Ben, there is a real sense that he's sort of, I don't know, there's wine in the cellar. He's developed capital over time. And incredibly impressive that he's managed to live through so unusually. I mean, 90 % of MPs left. He just has stayed. And I think we could do with more of that, actually. It must be odd around that cabinet table because so many of them actually entered politics after me. And I came in 13 years after him. Including Keir Starmer. Including Keir Starmer, yeah, in 2015. Yeah. No, I thought it was interesting. It'd be really interesting to hear what our listeners think.

1:08:35Because, I mean, the thing is he doesn't like, he's not one of those politicians who likes to tell his life story and talk about himself. He wants to focus on kind of policy and detail. And even the TBGB thing, you know, he was kind of portraying a nice picture. The creative tension. Well, there was creative tension. That is true. But there came a point where the tension drove out the creativity at times. But no, I think he's a really good, solid citizen. Now, on the Cirrus sort of bigger picture, I guess if one was going to put the other side, because he's obviously very proud of his job and he's a government minister defending.

1:09:16If we did end up in a war in the next 12 to 24 months, we're not ready, not remotely ready. And all this stuff about, you know, we're going to get up to 2.7 % by such and such a date, and we're going to have submarines by 2045, it's going to look mad. So the big question is the question you posed. What is the threat? because if it's real, my goodness, to be honest, the Nordics, the Baltics, the Poles are streets ahead of us. We are still very much gradual, gradual, business as usual, a bit more expenditure, but boy, are we not ready for the big stuff. And of course, he had to say what he said about the United States, but I sense part of what's happening with the European defense debate is they're sort of everybody is trying to kind of keep the Americans broadly on board re-NATO, re-Article 5, re-Ukraine, but at the same time understanding that that relationship is not as strong maybe as it was, and therefore we have to do more of our own.

1:10:19And part of the story of the Trump visit, which wasn't reported enough, is there were a loss of commitments around buying US defense equipment. And the problem is that we now have a presidency that, to quote Ursula von der Leyen, weaponizes dependency. the more dependent we are on US kit, the more we have a president who's prepared to use that. And I'm afraid the thing that I would have wanted to get onto is AI. If the future of war fighting is artificial intelligence, and the only countries with the large language models are the US and China, then Britain and Europe are in a very, very vulnerable situation with our defense and security, because we have to depend then on them not exploiting the fact that we rely on them.

1:11:08And of course, Trump loves exploiting anyone who relies on them. What do you think of his take on how to tackle reform? Yeah, well, I think he's really interesting on that, isn't he? Because he's a Rotherham MP. And it was interesting when you raised the flags, he said, isn't it great? Shows the patriotic pride of people. I think his line on Farage was very strong. I think it'd be nice to see other people say this is what he said about Putin's interestingly he didn't land Brexit on him I mean that's the obvious attack line that you keep pointing out which is 60 % of the British public now think Brexit was a mistake Farage delivered it for us and yet he doesn't get any of the blame I was trying to see whether he might sort of weave that into his attack line but don't worry Rory I'll keep going on about that until the day I die which will probably be about the same time we get these nuclear submarines.

1:11:58Exactly can I finish with a final cheeky question do you regret the fact that you didn't put him in the cabinet i mean look here's an immense talent he sat around for 13 years in junior ministerial positions why was he not right up at the top team with you guys it's a very good question i wonder i mean listen he got some serious jobs and did them well um i think it's partly because of this thing about maybe doesn't push himself doesn't do the list trust thing of you know look at me here i am just kind of gets on with the job and i wonder whether unfairly sometimes he got because he was very much part of gordon's you know in terms of the jobs that he did he was very much part of that whether at the time when he might have been thought to be going into the cabinet gordon would have been pressing for some people to be in the cabinet just as john prescott was and whether we thought that you know john healy was very much part of that gb thing and i don't know i think i think the other thing to say i would say about him i would actually say about andy burnham even though that's quite controversial at the moment i'd say about ed milliband um i think it's interesting to see how people develop i think i can look at john today and see a much more you talk about you know wine in the cellar i can see a much more solid complete politician that maybe was that how i saw him back then i can't remember to be honest.

1:13:23Great. Well, thank you. See you soon. See you soon. Bye-bye.