 Good evening and welcome to Tiske Sauer where we have watched Keir Starmer's full 90-minute speech, so you don't have to. We're going to take you through all the best bits this evening and to do so, I'm joined by Dalia Gabriel. Dalia, were you on the edge of your seat today watching Keir go on and on and on? I was on the edge of my seat trying to leave, trying to get the hell out of my screen because it was just, when something's both boring and also just incredibly aggravating and aggressively, you know, and aggressive, that's quite a difficult thing balance to strike, but he managed. There were a couple of effective bits. I'm going to show you the bits that I thought were effective as well as the bits that I don't think he quite pulled off and the bits where he was outright dishonest. There were a fair few of those. Before we get going, we do want to know your thoughts, do tweet them on the hashtag Tiske Sauer, put them in the comments box, we'll go to some of them throughout the show. Of course, as ever, do hit the subscribe button. Keir Starmer's speech to Labour Party conference was billed as a make or break moment for the beleaguered party leader. It certainly had its moments. There were an hour and a half, it was way, way too long. We'll pick out the key bit so you don't have to subject yourself to the full 90 minutes of a feature length film to kick us off the most predictable parts of the speech were the insults directed at Jeremy Corbyn. This is our first full conference since the 2019 general election in which we suffered our worst defeat since 1935. To those Labour voters who said their grandparents would turn in their graves, but they couldn't trust us with high office. To those who reluctantly chose the Tories because they didn't believe that our promises were credible. To the voters, to the voters, to the voters that thought we were unpatriotic or irresponsible or that we looked down on them. I say these simple but powerful words, we will never under my leadership go into an election with a manifesto that is not a serious plan for government. You could see that statement got a mixed response from the audience on the conference floor. That was one of the heckles that I thought was more effective, saying it was your Brexit policy. It wasn't the manifesto. Obviously the Brexit policy was in the manifesto. Some of the heckles were less effective than that. Of course, what Keir Starmer said there is a million miles from what he said in his leadership election when he said we shouldn't get rid of the policy shifts we made between 2015 and 2019. It also conveniently forgets that it was Starmer's policy for a second referendum, not any other detail in the manifesto that was principally responsible for Labour losing two and a half million votes between 2017 and 2019. In both of those elections, Labour went to the country with a radical manifesto. In only one of them did they get destroyed. John Tricket had a decent response to what Keir Starmer said there. He said, I sat through the whole meeting that agreed our 2019 manifesto. Just meters from Keir Starmer, every single policy was agreed unanimously, just to spell it out, including by Sir Keir. I recall not a single peep of dissent from that direction. So, once again, we have Keir Starmer both rewriting history and going against what he had said 18 months earlier. It goes without saying you can guarantee no one on the BBC will call him out on this. I have to say, watching the media respond to this, I've just been going bananas. Anyway, moving on. The speech had been billed as a chance for Keir Starmer to talk about who he is and where he comes from. That involved multiple references to his late father and set the stage for a decent joke. I'm not from a privileged background. My dad was a toolmaker. Although in a way, so was Boris Johnson. My dad was a toolmaker in a factory worked on the shop floor all his life. He gave me a deep respect for the dignity of work. There are some lines from Ordon that capture the beauty of skilled work. You need not see what someone is doing to know if it's his vocation. You only have to watch his eyes. How beautiful it is that I on the object look. I saw that I on the object look in my dad. The pride that good work brings. It puts food on the table and it provides a sense of dignity. So when I hear that this country is creating so many low paid jobs and when I tell you that good work and fair growth will be the priority for a Labour government. I haven't learnt this in some political seminar. I learnt it around the kitchen table. I learnt it at home from my dad. How pride derives from work. How work is the bedrock of a good economy and how a good economy is an essential partner of a good society. That is why I am so proud to lead a party whose name is Labour. Don't forget it. Don't forget it. Labour, the party of working people. That emphasis on work was there throughout the speech. On the one hand I suppose that could be to distinguish the Labour party and their voters from the Conservative party. You don't have to work for their money. I think also it's probably trying to highlight that Labour aren't the party for the work shy. We know where that discourse can take us. In the next part of the speech, Sakir then talked about his mother being a nurse who became disabled with stills disease. He explained how those experiences taught him the importance of the NHS. That was the story of where Stammer came from. To my mind though the most inspired part of the speech concerned what Stammer had done. The Labour leader was introduced to the stage by Doreen Lawrence who thanked him for helping to bring her son's murderers to justice. Then during the speech Stammer told the story of a young woman named Jane Clough who had been murdered by her partner while he was released on bail. Stammer described the day Jane's parents, Johnny and Penny came to him when he was director of public prosecutions. On the day that John and Penny were supposed to come and see me, to tell me about the cruel murder of their daughter and how the criminal justice system had let them down. My own daughter was born. We had to push back the meeting. It was an incredibly emotional day for all of us. As I listened to John and Penny tell me Jane's story I knew that a great injustice had been done. I made a promise to John and Penny at the end of that first meeting that I would work with them to make sure that no other family went through what they'd been forced to endure and we rolled up our sleeves and we changed the law. I am delighted to say that John and Penny have become good friends of mine and I am beyond honoured that they have joined us here today. Conference John and Penny Clough. Now that moment to my mind was effective in the same way that some of the videos at the start of Keir Stammer's leadership campaign where it was other people talking about how Stammer had helped them in the past in his previous job as a lawyer. In that video at the start of the leadership campaign we saw an ex-minor, we saw a mcliable defendants and we saw Doreen Lawrence again all speaking about how he did his job quite well at that period of time. It seemed to me smart that they did that again in this speech. I think having a prop of sort of people turning up who can vouch for you isn't a bad move. The downside I think fairly obviously actually is that if you're most effective when people are talking about your past job, potentially you were better at your past job than you are at the present one. I think Keir Stammer potentially a decent lawyer, not a particularly good politician. Everything I've shown you so far was in the first 20 minutes of that speech. There was another 70 minutes after that. In that time he did announce some policies. We'll get on to those in a moment but on the whole it was a rather rambling affair with lots of discussions of robots, tools and even gene editing. I won't subject you to all of it. Instead let's skip to Stammer's closing argument. This is a big moment, a time of rapid change. The first pandemic in a century, the aftermath of Brexit to sort out, the urgent claim of the climate, then our own domestic questions, providing a secure job that pays a decent wage, a good school nearby, health and social care that you can rely on, a home you can afford. This is a big moment that demands leadership. Leadership founded on the principles that have informed my life and with which I honour where I have come from. Work, care, equality, security. I think of these as British values. I think of them as the values that take you right to the heart of the British public and that is where this party must always be. I think of these values as my heirloom. The word loom from which the idea comes is another word for tool. Work, care, equality, security. These are the tools of my trade and with them I will go to work. Thank you conference. Those values are his heirloom and the word loom which comes from that idea or from which that idea comes is another word for tool and he will go to work with that tool. It's all slightly bizarre that ending. I'm also not sure the slogan work, care, equality, security is going to catch on. I think if you're going to do a slogan it's better if it works as a sentence rather than just four disparate words. Anyway, this is all detailed. Dahlia, what did you make of that speech? It's no for the many, not the few. I think we were down in Brighton and we were at the World Transforms Festival which happens alongside Labour Party Conference. The energy and the difference between those two spaces where TWT was this space of discussion and inclusion and participation and having people from different political traditions being pleased to see one another and engaging in one another's visions versus Labour Party Conference. You could really tell who was there for what when you were just walking around the streets. Obviously to an extent one could argue that one event there is to engage in this imagining work and to engage in this activist work and social movement work that has bigger space to be creative and the other one is about a party that wants to be in government. They will necessarily be different but the gulf was just so unimaginably wide and not only that but you didn't have this dynamic where both of these forces are feeding off one another and playing different roles in the transformation of British society but rather you have, as you outlined, Kirstama actively trying to cultivate a message of antagonism towards the party members and also the movement people who are represented by that kind of the world transformed. When you think about the exact moment that we're in, the moment of literally petrol shortages, this isn't something that we've seen but for decades in this country people aren't interested in factional Labour beef at this moment. They're interested in what Labour's vision is for the care crisis, the climate crisis, the crisis of work. For care he offered some sort of important platitudes but they frankly didn't sound that different to what we hear from the Tories. Even the Tories are kind of cottoning on to the idea that you need to give lip service to funding care services and the work vision completely out of touch. He's he's harking back to this industrial notion of work that does not exist in this country and is unlikely to come back. It's saying things like returning to this new Labour vision of we're not the party of the work shy, i.e. the party of people who are on social security or the party of people who are unemployed or who are precariously employed but the vast majority of your base are people who are do not have stable relationships to work because the work is not out there. Secure, stable work that pays a liveable wage is simply not out there and your answer to that is not to look at how has capital organized society in a way that people who work hard and people who are part of our society aren't able to afford their basic needs. You go into this victim blaming kind of benefit scrounger culture that was perpetuated by new Labour and really spearheaded by new Labour and that's just not a language that is going to resonate for the people that are going to vote for you who are disaffected by the economy that has been designed and then finally you know the stuff on climate breakdown again just sort of very weak platitudes on net zero not much vision for you know the reparative role that Britain would play in a climate justice movement not much distinction between what we would hear from Boris Johnson on climate crisis and then you pair that with the fact that you know the Labour for a Green New Deal's motion was they try to forcibly prevent it from being even discussed at Labour conference and I think that that what this is the fact that in the midst of so much crisis in this country Stammer has chosen to essentially trash his membership this is what people will remember from this conference if they remember anything the vast majority of people won't remember a single thing from this conference but the headline message there is that Keir Stammer is trashing his membership and you have to remember it's the membership that put Keir Stammer in charge it's actually not the electorate that put Keir Stammer in charge the membership put Keir Stammer in charge and he's not setting a very good example he's not giving a good indication to the British people of how he treats people who vote him into power not only do we have the you know complete U-turn and the completely different platform that he's actually you know operating on versus what he what he ran on but also you know you kind of generally expect that of any politician but it's the the deep disdain that he has for the people who put him in power it doesn't send it doesn't send a good message and I think that it's very important for Keir Stammer to understand that it is actually not the job of the party membership or of the electorate to vote for you it's actually not their job to force themselves to get behind you it's actually your job to convince them that you are the person who should be leading them it's actually your job to engage with them to win their votes to build a coalition that can put you in power and keep you in power and I think that he's got that massively twisted and it comes through in the disdain that is dripping from his tone when he sort of talks about you know wanting to sort of leave essentially what was the biggest expansion of any party in Europe behind and and describing that as if it was some kind of tragic event you know that the Labour Party grew so heavily and members got got so engaged and what I will finally say is that it is very clear that Keir Stammer's days as Labour leader are numbered you know this was the headlines from this as biased as the the media is towards or you know against Labour Party membership even still he couldn't get himself a decent headline in a lot of the media so it's very clear that his days are numbered so we need to really think about what our strategy is now there's no clear immediate successor so we need to really think about given that the Labour Party is becoming an establishment that is not interested in democratic engagement and democratic power we need to really think about what building power in that context means and we need to sort of really understand that the Labour Party particularly under the current leadership and what I assume will likely be the leadership after is part of the British state it is not part of the movement that is trying to hold the British state to account and so in that context I think we need to to really think from now what is the strategy and what is the move for when Keir Stammer inevitably is forced to step down as Labour leader. I do think I mean I do think he's got some of the headlines he wanted I mean because it seems to me that you know they've got some sort of phase for entering government I think they now want to show they're nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn they then want to sort of reassure people in the red wall which I think is what all this talk about family and work is about because Deborah Mattison has presumably gone out and done some focus groups and that's what they've fed back and then they think they're going to be able to at the end just say oh by the way you young people you people who care about the environment will give you maybe free tuition fees or give you something else and then you can all come back and if that's the plan I don't think they'll mind the headlines today because you've got the the BBC Stammer promises serious plan for government what was leading many of the news bulletins was was Keir sort of speaking down to the hecklers which is the image he wants to do is sort of I've defeated the left and last night he you know the news line was a very softball question from Laura Kuhnsberg asking him what do you value more party unity or entering government and which is the easiest question for him to answer because his whole you know the purpose of his leadership is to suggest that there is some conflict between party unity and entering government anyone would answer that entering government but he she's accepting the framing I don't think you can enter government with a party as divided as as Labour currently is and especially and and at this point in time I don't think you need to here Stammer could be learning from someone like Joe Biden I know lots of our viewers will have lots of problems with Joe Biden so do I but what he did show is that you can win as a centrist candidate whilst being inclusive of the left while adopting policies of the left such as massive investment high minimum wages etc etc etc whereas Keir Starmer seems to be just trying you know the Blair strategy all over again let's go to the policies announced there were some policies in this speech as I say none of them really making the headlines all the headlines are just I'm a serious guy and I don't like the left but let's for the for the purposes of being comprehensive go through the policies which announced there was to ensure mental health support is available less than a month after less than a month by hiring 8500 new specialist staff I think anyone who's ever known anyone who needs support for mental health will support that one retrofit 19 million homes within a decade to make sure they are properly insulated and energy efficient recruit thousands of new teachers and provide extra training for head teachers fast-track rape and sexual assault cases and toughened sentences for rape stalkers and domestic abusers set a target to invest a minimum of three percent of GDP into science and research and introduce a clean air act and make sure everything government does meets a net zero target um you know none of those I think are gonna radically transform Britain or the idea that you know of what labor would do when they get into government but I suppose it's a bit of a holding position the problem for me with with this darling more than anything is that I think at this point in time Keir Starmer is trying to impress the people who didn't like Jeremy Corbyn there are a lot of people in the population who didn't like Jeremy Corbyn he's trying to impress them say I'm nothing like this guy what I don't think he appreciates is how much bad blood this is creating among a significant minority of the population who did like Jeremy Corbyn right and who do think that lying to the labor membership is a bad thing now that's that's probably not a majority position you know if you ask the general public do you care that Keir Starmer told to the told some lies to labor members they might well say no I don't know but I think that is a big enough proportion of the electorate is going to create enough bad blood unnecessarily so by the way that it is really going to stand in the way of him winning any any general election he seems to think that we're all going to have short memories and when the election comes around sort of say oh fine yeah you might have called us racist you might have lied to us and then essentially laughed about it bragged about it but we'll come back to you now because there's no alternative I think he's probably going to get a nasty surprise yeah and I think that we really need to think you know anyone who is invested in labor being in power needs to really think about what the pathway to labor being in power is there is so much stacked against the party regardless of leader the media is overwhelmingly pro-conservative overwhelmingly so in terms of the media that people consume and that goes across different mediums from radio to broadcast to newspaper and also you know the geography of Britain has changed such that people who are who would be more inclined to vote for labor whether you know people of color working class people people who are precariously employed young people they are all being concentrated in cities and so a lot of the kind of electoral votes are going towards you know the conservative so essentially there are in designed within the system is a is a kind of system that is against the labor party being in power regardless of who is leading that labor party that is the situation that we're in now so I don't know how you get into power without a committed membership that is willing to do the groundwork that can make up for the fact that we don't have that there is not that pathway to power obviously you know there was a committed base for Jeremy Corbyn and it wasn't enough I'm not saying that it is enough on its own but we have to remember that but I can't see a pathway without it because we simply cannot push through the the narratives of the media which you know even more so than in 1997 when Blair one are endemicly pro-tory and endemic and endemic and very lacking in diversity is the main issue as well you know the concentration the monopolization of the media means that people are hearing sort of one message in slightly different costumes from all corners of the media spectrum but also again the changing geography of the country so my question is how do you expect to get to power in that context without a membership and an organizing force that is going to go out and do that groundwork for you you know I was hearing from people you know chatting to people in Brighton one thing I just kept hearing was that you know there was it's a real struggle to get people to do campaigning and canvassing during things like local elections during you know during any moment where it's where it's required sit in the past sort of year or so in a way that just was not the case over the past four years so the reason I think it's such a mistake mistake is because of you know the votes that will be lost the necessary votes that will be lost but also because I don't know what your party machinery can do right now I don't think it can be up to the challenge the uphill battle that we're in it's not enough on its own to have you know a highly organized geographically dispersed uh you know group of organizers who are willing to go out there and do the work for you but I don't think it's possible if you don't even have that I mean as we said on on Monday's show it's it's not even clear that Kirsten was particularly fussed about winning an election the principal priority at this conference was to secure a means to to make sure there's no left winger on an election for his successor so it seems from sort of the the voices the the briefings that are coming from Kirsten's team that they see this as job done they're not actually that fussed how people absorb the speech I think it was rather unprofessional to to have a 90-minute speech if you if you really cared about people listening to your your message in your speech you would you would have edited it a little bit more and so I was somewhat surprised about that because I thought he had employed I presumed he'd employed some some some professionals um potentially not uh penny wise says sadly I wasted 90 minutes of my life watching that boring claptrap just full of empty platitudes as I say even though I disagreed with quite a lot of the first 20 minutes I thought it was engaging after that I completely agree with you um Matthew Kerr's giving us 20 pound on the super chat thank you very much Daly and Haynes on the youtube super chat says Nick Thomas Simon's unable to roll off the minimum wage on LBC tells you everything you need to about Keith's labour hashtag Tory light that was a fairly awkward moment that was on LBC yesterday speaking to Nick Ferrari and yes the the shadow home secretary didn't know what the minimum wage was he said it's something under 10 pounds and the reason he knew that is because Labour's current pledge is to to raise it to 10 pounds so he's like we will raise it to 10 pounds Nick Ferrari asks him what is it now he says well it's definitely less than 10 pounds which I suppose was you know using some some inference there uh if you are promising to raise it to 10 pounds it presumably is below that julian pd tweets on the hashtag tiskey sour got home flicked on tiskey sour and thank god that I didn't watch the leader's speech so so boring we we chose the best bits for you um and Paul Sav says K Stammer was like bloody Alan Partridge up there he landed one good joke though I suppose Alan Partridge does sometimes as well we've got over 2000 people watching thank you for joining us this evening remember to let us know if you're enjoying the show by liking the stream we're going to go on to our next story the sentencing hearing of Wayne Cousins has brought the grim details of the murder of Sarah Everard into the public domain it's now apparent that in committing his horrific crime Wayne Cousins exploited to the full extent his job as a police officer up to now it had not been public knowledge how Sarah Everard had found herself in Cousins car we now know that Cousins abducted his victim by faking her arrest that involved handcuffing her after claiming she had breached Covid guidelines the BBC reports Cousins showed his warrant card before restraining Miss Everard putting her in his hire car and driving away the 48 year old had worked on Covid patrols in January and so would have known the appropriate formal terms regarding potential breaches the whole kidnapping took less than five minutes astonishingly the court was told that a couple traveling past in a car had witnessed the abduction but they assumed Miss Everard must have done something wrong following the kidnapped Cousins drove to a remote rural area where he raped Sarah Everard the court was told she was killed by strangulation with Cousins police belt it wasn't until a week after her disappearance that Everard's body was found in a woodland stream in Ashford Kent just meters away from land owned by Cousins let's go back to the BBC report they write her body and clothes have been put inside a refrigerator and set a light before being moved in builders bags the court heard that a couple of days after burning Miss Everard's body Cousins took his wife and two children on a family trip to the woods these details are just more horrific than than we could have imagined Dalia I want to to bring you in what what response can we possibly have to what what we've learned today this case is incredibly difficult to hear about it's incredibly difficult to listen to I think that obviously there is an issue here where when you have an entire group of people i.e the police who have the state backing to essentially violate and force people's bodies and it is seen as something that you cannot question and that if you dare to question the right of someone to do that um of one of these groups to do a member of this group to do that you are heavily criticized you are accused of all of all manner of things and whenever you have a system that is designed in that way you are going to not it's not so much that you're going to give cover to the odd bad apple but you're actually engendering the conditions for abuse and violence to take place we know that this issue is much bigger than Sarah Everard we know that between 2012 and 2018 600 accusations against police officers were were raised over sexual nature and only 119 of those were actually upheld so the vast majority of those are not upheld and the vast majority of those don't face any accountability but when it comes to the question of sexual violence and policing I think it's important to remember two things first of all we have the obvious case that you know when it comes to gender-based violence that police are not only responsible for for perpetuating gender-based violence but also you know anyone who has approached a police officer anyone who has gone to a police station after experiencing a sexual assault will know that you are essentially retraumatized when you go and you speak to the police you know I know for a fact that you will have questions like why did you go back to him why did you let him take that photo of you why did you send him that image why did you why did you why did you so all of these so there's this sort of well documented uh mishandling of sexual violence claims by the police so we know that policing is not equipped to deal with the problem of sexual violence in this country we know that but when it comes to actually the role that the police have not just in being unable to address or prevent sexual violence but actually in perpetuating sexual violence Sarah Everard is actually a unique case in the sense that this is actually not the typical way in which we see sexual violence at the hands of the police take place it's not typically an off-duty cop who you know kidnaps someone off the street it's actually much more endemic than that so you know I tweeted about this earlier about how many times have you heard jokes offhand comments about rape in prison how many times have you heard jokes about dropping a bar of soap in the prison showers those are essentially jokes and the normalization of the fact that sexual violence is seen as part of the punishment of incarceration it's seen as part of the justice of criminal justice and whether that's you know creating particular conditions of violence and trauma that leads lead inmates to harm one another or whether it's sexual violence and sexual abuse coming from officers towards towards inmates when you look at strip searches when you even look at stop and search you know anyone that you speak to anyone who has been a victim of stop and search it's violating you know it's violating and it's violating in the fact that someone is able to exert control over your personhood and you are not allowed to question it or ask anything about what is being done to you without threat of even further violence and so the thing that I really want to get across is that when we talk about sexual violence and and policing it's important to address how you know so many cops that have you know accusations like Wayne Cousins have like accusations of sexual misconduct against them how they are able to continue to not only be police officers but actually gain more and more power as police officers but also how our prison system how our system of policing that is supposed to be there to keep us safe from sexual violence not only is inadequate in dealing with sexual violence but is actually one of the biggest systemic perpetrators of sexual violence in itself you can't create a system that has sexual violence at the heart of it in the way that I've just outlined and not expect that to bleed out in ways that you might not have predicted so I think it's important to to talk about specifically what happened in this instance and how how we can ensure that there are no more Sarah Everards but also understand how this wider culture and this wider logic is actually embedded in parts of of policing and parts of the prison system that we actually consider to be normal businesses usual well what are your thoughts on I suppose on this specific case about how something like this can be made sure never to happen again I was listening to the radio today with a it was a female police officer I think she was she was high up in one of the police forces she was saying that one thing that needs to happen is police officers need to be you know trained and you know it needs to be really put forcefully that they should be calling out their colleagues if there is any sign whatsoever that they are abusers that they are the kind of people who will perpetrate sexual abuse and she was saying you know and she sounded like she was pretty confident about this this is not happening right now and there are a lot of police officers who are you know not necessarily the next weighing cousins but who are people who could well and could well be doing it already using their position as a police officer to abuse people she was saying yeah you could change the culture and try and get police officers to call out other police officers I don't know what else you you think would be a sort of commensurate response I mean I don't think that the issue is is lack of training of people to call these things out I'm sure that people do call these things out although what I would say is that anyone who's been on a demo particularly a demo that is critical of the police will see police acting violently and aggressively in a deeply unnecessary manner and we'll see their colleagues standing by and you know letting them have it letting them have at it so I don't think that the training is the issue I think the issue is what the police are told they are there to do and what the police are there to do and the fact that essentially we treat the fact that that you know as a police officer you know we heard in that story that this police officer was arresting Sarah Everard and people witnessed it and they just said we just assumed that she had done something wrong I think we need to really understand that if you're going to give a group of people the back it the state back there are very very few instances in which you act actually need to physically touch someone and what we know about the police is that they do it wantonly they do it without it's seen as such an every day you know nothing thing to sort of arrest someone and bundle them into a car and take them off to a police station it's an it's an it's a mundane thing to beat the shit out of protesters at a demo it's seen as a mundane thing to stop someone while they're you know getting on the bus or doing something mundane and demand that they empty all their pockets in that you can pat them down and even take them to a cell and strip search them this is an incredibly huge amount of power which as you know I mean I know we've had disagreements on policing but I don't think it's something that actually prevents or solves violence and harm I think that act that whole thing that whole process even when it doesn't go as far as it did in this situation I think it actually perpetuates trauma and harm amongst people I don't think it really protects or helps them but even if you're going to have that as a concept we have to understand that this is just such a huge amount of power and it's done so with such little accountability and such little transparency and such it's so blasé and I think that so there's that kind of issue there's that issue of our general culture towards the police where anything that a police officer says goes and that's something that is that is you know endemic in our media it's endemic in our culture we know this but I think there's also a really interesting thing to be said about you know obviously we're we're also dealing with with the murder of Sabina Nessa and there have been some conversations about how you know oh like visibility for for Sarah Everard has been so much bigger than Sabina Nessa and you know this is related to the fact that Sabina Nessa is a woman of color and Sarah Everard is a white woman and that is probably true it is probably true that you know there are more column inches there are more sort of there is more shock there's more sort of fear or media attention towards a white woman victim than a brown woman victim I think it's really important to note that both women are still at at the end of the day are still in the same position they still were both killed by a violent man and Sarah Everard has still not gotten justice and what I mean by that is first of all justice would be her having never been killed in the first place but the changes that actually need to happen are unlikely to actually happen despite that visibility and despite that recognition and so as much as yes there is a question of white I mean I don't know if you can call any victim of a murder privilege in any way but there is a sort of a sense of unevenness and visibility but at the end of the day visibility and conversation doesn't actually get justice what gets justice is systemic change and what I believe that systemic change has to look like is a radical radical radical shift away from policing as the way that we deal with social conflict and social issues because more often than not all the police do are is traumatized people harm people who then go on to do more harm within their community because of how they've been traumatized by the police and even when they aren't the perpetrators of that harm they don't actually have the tools and the ability to deal with harm when it has taken place and to deal with actually helping the process of healing when people have been harmed so we need a radical move away and reduction of the role that police play in society because at the moment what we have is a dynamic where the state has withdrawn all of the small mechanisms that it might have for offering care for offering well-being for offering welfare and an absorption of all of that into the militarized violent arms of the state so we see an expansion of policing at the same time as we see a reduction in welfare and that is the wrong direction and I think that is why as much as Sarah Everard might we might she might be in the front pages we might be hearing a lot about her we might be having a lot of these conversations what matters isn't visibility what matters if is if that visibility actually gets changed and I don't think that from the way that this story is being narrativized which is very much still bad apples and an otherwise healthy tree really suggests to me that we're going to get to where we need to get to. We disagree on the end goal do we want to reform the police or abolish them I think we can both agree that what has happened here shows that this is more than just a bad apple this is an institutional problem in the police and it requires an institutional response one final thing I'd say on this is that I thought was particularly interesting comments surrounding this is people were saying you know God it must be so awful to have been that couple who witnessed this and and went past the police and you can't blame them for going past because you know they would have expected a cop to be arresting someone if you know they had a right to arrest them what what I did hear said that it was even if they had you know gone up to to that person if you ask a police officer what are you doing why you're arresting this person if you are someone who is being arrested oh do you do know why you're being arrested etc what you will get is abuse from the cops they'll they'll tell you to go away and threaten to arrest you so we do live in a society where it's seen as deeply suspicious to ask what authority the police are acting with and you know this in an extremely extreme way shows how how dangerous that is and and why we all should embrace this idea that when the police are doing something everyone in the vicinity has a right to know what it is and what power what authority they're they're using to try and limit the the number of abuses which which we know are are carried out on a very very regular basis even if not always as extreme as this one let's go on to our final story we've offered a fair amount of speculation on this show as to why Andrew Neil the BBC's former star interviewer left GB news now thanks to an interview in the Daily Mail we can hear his perspective straight from the horse's mouth the piece is headlined GB news is just a disaster I came close to a breakdown it would have killed me to carry on I had to quit Andrew Neil breaks down in tears in his first interview since his exit from channel he helped create it's an article with some real jaw droppers we'll take you through some of the juiciest bits to begin as was clear anyone who watched the first two weeks of GB news will know that the channel was beset by technical mishaps Neil describes the impact that had on him he says that stress was just huge it meant you couldn't think about the journalism you were just constantly wondering will we make it through the hour by the end of that first week I knew I had to get out it was really beginning to affect my health I wasn't sleeping poor Andrew losing sleep because the the Chiron's were wrong under different guests images on on on GB news you really do feel sorry for the man ever vain Neil was also upset about the set he said it actually looked like I was Kim Jong-un in a bunker about to launch a nuclear attack on San Francisco when it came to the launch the digital war wasn't ready and they discovered they couldn't light or get the sound and audio right for the kitchen table so we were then reduced to the habitat sofa found on a skip and the North Korean nuclear bunker I think he's using poetic license there when he says the habitat sofa was found on a skip and but he was he was not impressed with how the studio looked so Neil used to the high standards of the BBC was not pleased was not satisfied with the DIY aesthetic of the upstart channel but he also emphasized that his ultimate reason for leaving was not a lack of technical standards but rather journalistic ones he described some pretty wacky ideas from GB news's bosses so he reveals the following one of the great ideas before I left was we do trial by television on the guilty men of Brexit those who tried to stop it like Lord Adonis and Nick Clegg I said why do you want to do that you won the referendum we're out but let me remind you that was the most miserable period of modern British politics we should be looking forward to the 2020s another suggestion was that we should put secret cameras in classrooms to show how left-wing the teachers were I said that's a really good idea but I think you should take charge of that yourself and I promise you that after you get in hot water for breaking about five different laws including filming minors come back and talk to me it goes without saying that Andrew Neil hasn't taken any of this well he complained to the mail why pay me all that money why make me chairman why make me lead presenter and then just not listen so I'm angry that what should have been my last big media gig which if we'd made it work could have been great turned out to be the worst eight months of my career the worst by far from early January to last weekend when I finally got free of everything don't forget I've been on the IRA hit list twice I've had special protection anti-terrorist forces outside my house I've been on the jihadists hit list this feels worse that yeah who does your sympathy lie with in this very sorry tale I mean I do really wonder where all that money when I was speaking to someone who was who was in Labour Conference I didn't go into into conference proper but they said that GB news was like the biggest production of all of the different media they had like the biggest store when it looked like they had their kind of own studio in conference I'm just like there's just so much money and I'm just like where has this money gone it's like a money hole but I think I mean on the topic of who do I feel sympathy with I mean let's be clear and Trineal is not you know breaking down because he spearheaded a project that tried to boost the careers of every sort of whatless right-wing presenter out there from sort of Dan Wooten to Nigel Farage he's not breaking down because a presenter was you know literally cancelled from his anti-cancel culture TV show or network for taking the knee in solidarity with England football players who had been facing racist abuse in the wake of the the Euro's match all he took he's he's having a breakdown because he you know accidentally became the face and ruined his legacy by becoming the face of what looks like a low-budget embarrassing production like all he talked about was himself and how hard it was for him how he doesn't get any sleep and he doesn't think at all about you know all of those communities that are in the crosshairs of the culture wars who experience on a micro and a macro level the effect of the talking points that GB news was essentially set up to embed in even further into our culture because let me tell you those people have had a lot of sleepless nights they've experienced a lot of stress a lot of negative impacts from having to live in that kind of culture and they don't get to fall back on you know a nice daily mail column where they get to kind of garner sympathy or fall back on a nice career and I want to you know I actually want to read out sort of a section from Andrew Neil's opening monologue to give you an understanding that this he knew what he was doing it's not the politics of this and I think now he's you know in question time he was kind of trying to roll back on this to say you know oh wait you know why do you think I left this because it was so divisive Andrew Neil knew exactly what he was getting involved in the issue was that it just looked kind of crappy like he said his opening monologue said we will puncture the pomposity of our elites and politics business media and academia and expose their growing promotion of cancel culture to the threat of free speech and democracy that it is we will be more concerned with what will raise prosperity and create jobs in our left behind towns than what some overprivileged and a historic students decide to hang on their walls in oxford social mobility and a fair chance in life for all will matter more to us than the wasteland to nowhere that is identity politics now the dog whistle is a foghorn essentially that was all about saying you know we will speak to you you know voters who are fed up of you know black and brown and queer people having their concerns represented in politics they don't matter their concerns don't matter we we will you know talk about cancel culture and then cancel the very people who express views that are not aligned with our world vision and so Andrew Neil's what you can see in that opening monologue is that it was always his intention to throw a match onto a country that is drenched in petrol right now that is drenched in you know exploitation and division that is being metabolized in the form of you know the rise of a far right essentially and yet it ended up looking low budget and that's what he feels very embarrassed about but that intention that he had to cultivate this culture to to drag the british media landscape even further to the right and to essentially create a british fox news um that intention is still there and that's an intention that i have zero sympathy for Andrew Neil was going for the culture war you know angle it wasn't something that came from from without him the woke watch section that was on Andrew Neil show right so he said oh we're not going to talk about the obsessions of of student politics etc we're going to talk about how to level up the country and bring prosperity to the rest of the country right i didn't see any segments on gb news about investment in regional areas you know i didn't i didn't see any any segments on on new businesses opening and creating jobs all there was was andrew neil going on and on and on about some new controversy or someone who wanted rights or someone who wanted to deny someone else their rights you know there was nothing about any of the the things that they said or he said was lacking from the mainstream media so all he did was go and talk about cancel culture and complain that all we talk about is cancel culture is it was just the most hypocritical thing i've ever seen um the worry now i suppose is that the the news uk channel comes and does what gb news tried to do but did a little better i want to show you the response from gb news to this interview from andrew neil they said the following at no point did andrew raise concerns of the editorial direction of gb news moving to the right as a member of the board andrew had the same rights and abilities to raise concerns and he was privy to all decisions now that statement to me i don't trust the gb news spokesperson but i would guess that if they're saying at no point did andrew raise concerns that means that there are no emails which exist of andrew neil raising concerns because otherwise he would be able to embarrass them quite quickly you might say oh maybe they spoke about it in a meeting andrew neil was doing most of this from the south of france so these communications would have happened via email and i imagine if andrew neil had been really annoyed about the direction of the channel politically there would have been some evidence so i mean i agree with you dahlia it does seem like a fairly post facto justification for leaving a channel that he basically thought was making him look a bit silly and the lighting wasn't good enough to to draw out the the orange shades in his in his southern france tanned skin um the final comments on this particular story before we end tonight what do you expect to happen when you have the roster of presenters that he was that he was presenting and the thing is here as well is you know you talked about how we didn't see any segments on you know what to do with the increasing precarity of employment throughout the country we didn't hear anything about you know housing crisis about any of these issues that that he's allegedly you know trying to trying to speak to and what the meet the rest of the media won't talk about and it's because the whole point of this formula is to speak back to and reflect people's material concerns and reflect the disaffection that people feel and then just talk for hours and hours and hours about how working class black and brown people are the reason that you are experiencing the disaffection that you're experiencing and this is why it's such a toxic mix and it's why Fox News has been such a driving political force of the far right in the in the in the US is because it sort of speaks a little bit to the kind of very real issues that people are facing and the real alienation and disaffection that people are facing and then just sort of fills all of the gaps with you know it's because people don't want the story of empire to be whitewashed so that's actually very much engineered in in the design of this particular model of you know Fox News style culture warmongering so it doesn't surprise me at all that we didn't hear anything that could actually be about sort of levelling up whatever that whatever that means let's go to some comments nobody have no tweets on the hashtag tisky sour probably worth noting again that starma vowed to give police more powers today another indicator of his lack of societal understanding and how to address crime but incredibly tone deaf in the context of this news i know that offended quite rightly lots of people in his speech he talked specifically about um women being at risk of sexual assault and then his response was saying let's have more police on the streets where on the day we heard how a police officer exploited his his role as a police officer to do unimaginable things um is is pretty tone deaf um mike d with a fiver slightly off topic but is kia starma deliberately pushing away union so he can get business backing before crushing them or at least his successor can it's an interesting one i think kia starma up to now has been quite keen to keep some of those trade unions on side because he needed their votes to change the rules now there might be a more complex relationship between the two i don't think he's going to be particularly worried that some of the trade unions were out on the radio saying we want a 15 pound minimum wage and he's saying no because he he's doing that that Tony Blair thing of saying i'm not in hot to the unions i'm not in hot to the left so the more they criticize him he thinks the better that is um let's wrap up darling it's been a pleasure speaking to you this evening it's been wonderful to see you michael wonderful to see you two are much more enjoyable 60 minutes than the the last 60 minutes of kia starma's 90 minute speech um thank you for watching tisgis out we'll be back on friday at seven p.m for now you've been watching navara media good night