 So today, ballots dropped for the leader and the deputy leader of the Labour Party. Ballots will be open until the 2nd of April with the winner announced at a special conference two days later. As I say, there haven't been any big last-minute stories, except that over half a million Labour members received an A-free poster of Keir Starmer's face with the words integrity, authority and unity plastered over them. I think we're going to get that up. Now, many people have commented that these posters were presumably fairly expensive if they've gone out to half a million people, reasonable quality, even if he is in grayscale, which some people have thought was, you know, appropriate. Well, you've still got the red. I mean, yeah, so I suppose it's not mean they paid for colour printing prices, even though it's in grayscale, potentially. I think people are saying about quarter of a million pounds, probably that would have cost. This question was put to Keir Starmer. So I think as it goes in these leadership races, you don't really need to declare how much or you don't need to declare who's donating money to you until afterwards. So he's saying he's conforming to the rules, which presumably he is. But there is a question that he should say before ballot stop, where the money's coming from. We'll look at Kay Burley putting this question to Starmer before I go to you to this was this morning on Sky. And what do you say to those who suggest that it's not really an even playing a level playing field because you've got quite wealthy backers with deep pockets and they're allowing you to spend all sorts of money on campaign literature that the other two just can't afford. Well, there are very strict rules, as you know, for these competitions, everything that is given to any campaign has to be not only registered but also declared. I've had contributions from trade unions, from crowdfunding and from individuals, and I'm sure the other candidates have as well. I think this is one of those things that's swirling around. So far, as I say, the candidates themselves have avoided taking lumps out of each other. I think some of the outriders are trying to stir things up a bit now. But in the end, of course, there has to be transparency and accountability, and we will all be declaring where our money came from and how much we each spent on the campaign. That was Kier Starmer saying he's received money from trade unions, crowdfunding and individuals. Slightly less of an emphasis on that one, because presumably they are high value individuals. Darlia, does this matter? I mean, I think firstly, what he said then, something that has been really frustrating me is this idea of, oh, in this leadership race, we've avoided taking lumps out of each other. You know, sorry, this is an election. I need you to tell me what you're offering that's distinct, why I should vote for you and not the other person. I just find this kind of like milk toast, like just kind of like liberal, oh, let's all just be polite. And it's the same thing with Bernie Sanders, like this idea, oh, no, he's shouting, and I just don't like him. And it's just like this whole kind of like emphasis on politeness and stuff like that. And I'm just like, no, I want to feel that, you know, I'm being offered different visions, and I want to feel that you are passionate and fighting for those different visions. I think the fact, the idea that he can't disclose, that the late labor leadership rules don't mean that you have to disclose who is funding you is absolutely ridiculous. It's obviously relevant. But I think that essentially what is sad about this situation is that precisely in part because none of the candidates have been bold enough really to show what vision they are outlining for the future of the Labor Party and not why they are different to the others beyond just like the same platitudes around unity means that there's very little to say about the about the labor leadership competition. And that's kind of really quite sad. The whole unity, let's be nice to each other plays exactly to Keir Starmer. That's exactly the terrain he wants to keep this in. Because as long as that's the debate, and it's not about his political record, or it's not about policy, he's won. He's won easily. The man has no vision. Well, you know, look, it may work out. I mean, I could be wrong. Maybe people really want a boring sense left. I have no, you know, I probably, I think you're probably, I think you're almost certainly right. That's my opinion. I mean, I'd probably at least an Andy. However, this strategy is obviously intentional and it suits him down to the ground. But I think the question should be, where's Rebecca Long-Bailey? Rebecca Long-Bailey should be saying, I'm going to declare today, here are my funders, transparency, because I think you should know, not in six months time, but before you vote for us in receipt of all the facts. You know, and that's the story. And then all of a sudden, that's going to be in broadcast and radio, TV or being printed online very quickly. She's chosen not to do that. And so, you know, if you've got the front runner gaining significantly from a very boring, comradely campaign, and the other two aren't willing to go in, at least an Andy doesn't want to, because she wants a good job with them and she can't win. Rebecca Long-Bailey can win. And she won't get a good job with him. No, that's, you know, that's ultimately down to her. And that suggests to me, I'm voting for Rebecca Long-Bailey, by the way. I think she'd be a pretty good leader. I think she's got the best CV of the three. I think she's got the best policy chops of the three. She's got the best political judgment of the three. However, clearly she doesn't want to go in for this. She doesn't want to attack him on his political record. She doesn't want to attack him on campaign funding. Campaign funding is a really important political issue. Transparency about who is financing you in politics is a really big deal. This is not, you know, a personal attack. And it's a very constitutive part of liberal politics to conflate personal attacks with political critique. You know, if we want to take on the powerful, take on the elite, make Britain a less unequal society, then of course campaign finance is a salient issue. And of course he knows that and he's pretending otherwise. Now, Sky and the BBC aren't going to go all in. So, Rebecca Long-Bailey's got to say, well, look, you have to declare who is funding you. If she won't, if she doesn't do it, nobody will. It's also interesting what you said in terms of, you know, he didn't even bother answering. You know, he said, look, none of the other candidates have made this an issue. So, it's not an issue. And that is actually how the media, like the political media often works. So, if you think about, you know, the anti-Semitism row in the Labour Party, the reason that continued as such a big story is because Labour MPs were saying it's an institutional problem. And so, whenever you went on the media, it'd be like, well, why are these MPs saying it's an institutional problem? And the reason, you know, the media respond to one politician attacking another politician is because they're a little bit lazy. So, they say a story is a story once one politician is saying it's a story about another politician. And unless Rebecca Long-Bailey leads on this, unless Rebecca Long-Bailey leads on the charge, then the media will think, well, I suppose if she's not making it an issue, maybe it's not an issue. Yeah. And I think that, again, and this was something that we saw sort of towards the end of Corbyn's tenure is this idea that the primary aim is to survive. It's survival and it's survival by the skin of your teeth rather than the primary aim being shaping and moving the conversation and moving and creating struggle because struggle and conflict is an important part of politics. Like conflict is meant to be part of political, and again, it's this kind of fabrication of this liberal kind of consensus that conflict shouldn't be part of it. But it is. That's what politics is. So, I think that this kind of sense that this cautiousness and aim to survive rather than to thrive is to me a signal of a continuation of the flaws and the insecurity that surrounded a lot of the Corbyn campaign. But what I would say again is that Rebecca Long-Bailey has done a lot of really, really interesting, she has a lot in her record of very interesting stuff that in the short amount of time that she's been an MP for the Labour Party, the stuff she's done around the Green Industrial Revolution, which is not just about a shopping list of policies, but it was a manifesto that was created from like a manifesto specifically for the Green Industrial Revolution was very much created from the ground up, holding those kind of town halls with, she toured around the country doing these town halls for the Green Industrial Revolution, building this kind of like new program that also was looking at ground up policymaking. And, you know, that's why I'm going to vote for her. I'm voting for her because I feel like she's the only one, not because I think that her political outlook is like perfect. I feel like I don't even know that much about her political outlook, not in the way that I knew like Jeremy Corbyn's political ideology, but because through the Green Industrial Revolution, I had a sense that she trusted every day working class people to be part of crafting Labour's priorities. And again, it's that question of power. And she was one of the only Labour MPs who have ever done something like that in the kind of like this bout of Labour MPs, but she's not calling on that record. And I just don't know why. In a way, I think she is. I mean, she has kind of called on that record. I think there are a number of good reasons to vote for Rebecca Long-Bailey, but she's not making those arguments strongly enough. And so I think is one is to say, look, she is, to a large degree, the Corbyn continuity candidate, right? And I think her attempt to distance herself from that was always going to be unsuccessful because she's the Corbynite in the race. But your response to that should be, look, I'd rather be, you know, forget Brexit and forget how it all fucked up in those two years. I'd rather be Corbyn in 2017 than Ed Miliband in 2015. Ed Miliband in 2015, 30%, Corbyn in 2017, 40%. Who looks like Ed Miliband in this race? It's Keir Starmer. It's Keir Starmer, the 30% candidate and Rebecca Long-Bailey, the 40% candidate because that looks like a more attractive proposition. The other is to say that, you know, we've seen what happens when you have a politician who doesn't lead but follows. And I think there are plenty of arguments that could be made about Keir Starmer, which is that he sort of takes the easy option. So you saw it was sort of when he said, I won't talk to the sun during the leadership election, but I might talk to them afterwards. Like that is the easiest possible thing you can commit to to say, I won't speak to the sun when I'm appealing to a electorate that don't read the sun, but I might do when I'm appealing to an electorate where some of them do. So I think you can paint Keir Starmer, at least in his political career, taking the easy option, which is something that Rebecca Long-Bailey threw back in Jeremy Corbyn when she was just a young MP voting against the welfare bill when she was a very, very new MP. You can say that she hasn't taken the path of least resistance. Also the DPP stuff. You know, she's already had a prominent role in a national institution where you have huge amounts of exposure and public attention, which is what will happen when he's a Labour leader. What did he do that was particularly radical or different as director of public prosecutions? Not much. So why all of a sudden is he going to bring this whole new approach to Labour and do things we've not seen for years and winning majority, winning the words of Paul Mason, 80 seats? That's nowhere in his political record. That's not his career trajectory before politics. It's not his personality type. This is projection. The guys are cipher. I mean, I hope I'm wrong, you know. I hope I'm wrong. I hope he wins on a sense left agenda. And you know, we're on the left of that coalition. I would love that to be true, but I'm just not seeing any evidence for it.