Today I'm interviewing Keir.
Not my cat, that would be weird,
Keir Starmer, who's named after
the same person as my cat:
Keir Hardie, the first leader of the Labour
party.
Keir Starmer is Labour's Brexit spokesperson.
He's the one who has to go out
and sell Labour's position on
the minor issue facing the country,
which is leaving the European Union.
So I want to talk to him about that,
how's it splitting Labour's base
and what can Labour do to turn everything
around?
Thanks very much. Take care. Bye bye.
On the doorstep are people ... Have people
been angry?
Have they said: 'Look, I'm pretty pissed off
'with Labour over article 50'?
Is that coming up at all?
Brexit comes up now and again but it doesn't come up
anything like the number of times I thought it would.
It's rare in London, it's even rarer outside of London.
People are talking about the health service,
they're talking about education, they're talking about,
you know, what they want out of the final EU negotiations
but nobody really is talking about,
or very few people are talking about Brexit itself.
It's important for me to remind myself:
why did I want to stay in the EU?
I want to stay in because I believe in collaboration
and cooperation and internationalism,
and I don't think there's any reason
why a future deal with the EU
shouldn't be built on those principles.
This is a Labour heartland.
Yep.
You know, you got a huge majority
at the last election and people here voted to remain.
There are people in this constituency, no
doubt,
who think this is all a bit of a nightmare.
Then you've got other people in Labour heartlands
in the north who think they've got their country back,
who voted Labour and they voted to leave.
How do you bring that coalition together?
They just fundamentally have different worldviews,
different visions, different perspectives.
That's what people argue.
I mean, it is ...
The maths is difficult for the Labour party
because two thirds of our MPs are in leave seats
and one third are in remain seats.
We've got to do this from a position of principle.
Did we agree that we would put this decision
out to the public for a vote? Yes.
Did we agree that we would accept the result? Yes.
Have we got to accept the result? Yes.
So, the first position is a matter of principle.
Having done this, having got a result,
we've got to accept it.
Simply saying: ‘Well, it's better for us electorally
'if we do this or do that’ doesn't help.
Do you think the problem is, you know,
on both sides you get some who go:
‘People who voted leave are a bunch
'of knuckle-dragging, xenophobic bigots.’
And on the other side you've got this:
‘People who who voted remain are a bunch of
'metropolitan, liberal, middle class elitists.’ And both ...
[Laughs]
You do get that though, don't you?
You do get that but these characterisations
simply don't work.
I mean, I think lots of people voted leave
for lots of different reasons.
But we have to ask ourselves why did that phrase,
‘take back control’ …
Why was it a Heineken phrase?
Why did it get into people?
I think it got into people because too many people feel:
‘I don't have the ability to influence my life
'in the way I would like to.’
And we've got to listen to that.
This vote, last year, was years in the coming.
It was years in the coming
and I think there was political failure there
that went on for a very, very long time.
If we don't understand that
and we just take it as a superficial level of
‘it's formally in or out of the EU’,
we're missing a major political issue of our time.
A lot of people outside of London look at a constituency
like yours and they think it's full of a bunch of
latte-drinking liberals wearing sandals,
living in big homes but, actually, a lot of people
who are economically precarious around here
voted to remain. So why is that?
Yeah, so first and foremost all London constituencies,
and this one in particular is full of inequality everywhere.
Huge inequality. We've got four in 10 kids
living in poverty in Camden.
Every week in my surgery
I have mum, dad and two or three kids
in a one-bedroom flat because we haven't got enough housing.
So there's real deprivation and poverty
right here in north London.
So this idea of a sort of metropolitan elite
really doesn't work for this constituency.
Rightly or wrongly, people look in on London
and the south-east and think:
‘Well, that's where all the money, the power,
'the resources, the decision-making is,
'and we are not getting any of it for ourselves.’
So all of this was wrapped up,
I don't think it was one-dimensional.
In terms of the difference between the Tory
approach
and the Labour approach -
because some people will say this -
because you're saying Labour have accepted
freedom of movement will end
when we leave the European Union ...
Well, it's not Labour saying it, it's true.
But if you accept that,
then how can you get anything other than a hard Brexit?
Because the EU will say:
‘If you don't accept freedom of movement, that's it, fine,
we're not going to give you the single market,
customs union, you are out. Full stop.’
Yeah. Well, the first thing is that freedom of movement
is built into the treaty that we've just given notice
that we're withdrawing from.
So it's not Labour saying freedom of movement is going,
it is going because it's one of the rules of a treaty
that we've just said we're leaving. So that's a given.
We can't get away from the fact
that it was a major issue in the referendum.
What we need now is a sensible, grown-up debate
about what a fair, effective and humane
immigration policy looks like.
And actually when I say that to people
there's not that much resistance.
People have equated the end of free movement
with no movement.
Actually it's a blank piece of paper
upon which we can write sensible rules that work
for the economy and work for communities,
and they need to be fair and effective, of course,
and they need to be more humane.
That is quite an opportunity for the Labour
party
to do something in an area where, frankly,
it's been on the back foot for too many years.
What's the key difference with the Tory Brexit
that Labour are offering?
Firstly, that we want that collaborative,
cooperative outcome.
Secondly, that we will absolutely entrench
the EU rights that we've got now
and that is a major difference between us.
But actually, the tone and approach is really important.
These are international negotiations
and the tone and approach you take
makes all the difference.
It could be the difference between having a deal
and not having a deal,
and not having a deal is a disaster.
I mean, this casual talking up of no deal
is really, really damaging.
There are huge differences here
and the tone and approach
the prime minister is taking,
this belligerent, extremist approach
is walking us towards that position.
What do you think about ...
You know, Theresa May, the other week
she did that big speech, didn't she, going basically:
'Aarrgh! They're coming to get us!
'You know, the EU leaders are threatening us,
'they're menacing us.'
What ... What ... Do you think she really meant that
or was she genuinely trying to destroy our relations
with our nearest neighbours
basically because she thought
she'd get a few votes out of it?
She wants to get a few votes out of that.
That is exactly right.
Party interest before the national interest.
That's exactly what it was.
How would you say to people who are maybe undecided,
they're thinking: 'Maybe I like Theresa May.'
Lots of people do like Theresa May.
They've said they've changed,
they're standing up for vested interests.
Well, they've been in power for seven years.
They have, yeah.
That's what I say to people.
I've noticed.
And if you don't think seven years
is enough to change things,
what about 1945? What about 1997?
They've done absolutely nothing.
They claim to be the party of working people,
they've changed.
They've done nothing in that seven years that's actually
helped working people.
Wages have gone down, the ability to have
an employment tribunal has been
wiped out by introducing fees
and public services have been decimated
and the NHS is in crisis.
So, seven years and they've done absolutely nothing.
Theresa May. What do you think of Theresa May?
I think she's really guarded. I think she hates challenge.
She hides behind mantra: 'Brexit means Brexit',
'no running commentary', 'no deal's better than a bad deal',
'strong and stable'.
Look behind them and there's nothing there.
What is the strategy now to keep the seats we've got,
maybe even win some, how do we do that?
First and foremost we've got to be confident.
If we go round like this.
In the foetal position, rocking.
Yeah, you know, if we go around saying:
'Oh, the polls aren't very good ...'
We've got to go around like that, actually.
and if you go around with candidates who are like that,
they're knocking on doors and getting a positive response.
The first thing is actually believe that we're going to win.
Some self-belief, some self-confidence.
Grrrrr!
Yeah, I mean, you know it counts for a lot.
I think there's actually a pretty clear divide now
between what we would do and what they would do.
Our manifesto is clear.
They've gone for this narrow-minded,
little Britain approach.
This is giving a clear signal to the world
that they want to close in on ourselves.
There's two different versions of the future of Britain here
and I think that really helps in going out there.
So there's hope?
There's hope. Let's have some confidence,
let's get out there.
There are, you know, 650 mini-elections going on.
We've got to be in those mini-elections,
not just obsessed with the national poll.
So I want to hear what you think about the referendum,
about Brexit, about the future of the country,
whatever you want to throw in that comment box.
I'll do my best to answer it.
We do need to do a comments video.
We've got loads of interviews coming up.
You can probably see some of them on screen
if Adam's put them there.
But, as ever, thanks for subscribing
and I'll see you next time.
