‘Labour Is No Longer A National Party’ | Andrew Neil & Patrick Maguire

the sorts of towns that reliably, even when Labor is at its lowest, even under Jeremy Corbyn, elect the MPs who sit in Karma's cabinet and indeed Karma himself, can no longer be depended on to vote for the Labour party. >> Let's speak to Patrick Maguire. He's the chief political commentator of the Times. Uh Patrick, um we know that Kia Star's job will be back on the line. I wonder though if these results aren't even bigger than whether Kia Starmer still has a job or not as to what they tell us as to whether the Labor Party itself is much of a future. >> Yes, you're completely right, Andrew. What is at stake here is the future of the Labor Party as a going concern nationally. And then you look at these results, particularly outside of the M25, although from what I hear from senior Labour sources and people in Downing Street, what we're going to see inside the M25 isn't going to be much better. Just look at happening. But Labour's historic base, and not just his its historic base, the sorts of towns that reliably, even when Labor is at its lowest, even under Jeremy Corbyn, elect the MPs who sit in Karma's cabinet and indeed Karma himself can no longer be depended on to vote for the Labour Party for reform to be winning comfortably in the sorts of places they have in Tameside, in Hartley, in Holen, just outside of Mury. side. This is not normal for the Labour party and anybody consoling themselves with the idea that oh it's not as it bad it's not quite as bad as it might have been in London. Labour is losing everywhere to everyone. Look, it's even losing seats to the tries in Peterbr and Wsworth. You know, it's going to lose seats to Gaza independents. It's going to lose seats the SNP implied. It is a losing party absolutely everywhere today. >> Right. I mean on the basis of that and you're absolutely right Patrick they are having chunks taken out of them by almost everybody everywhere and we haven't got to Scotland and Wales in any major way yet. What does that mean then for Kier Starmer? What does it mean for the Labour Party? Because changing leader wouldn't necessarily change the fortunes of the governing party. >> Well, it's the political equivalent of a raw shark test something this messy isn't it? Because you can look at it and infer anything you like. So there'll be a big body of opinion that says, "Look, the Greens are the problem." You'll have a ground swell of people saying, "We've ignored reform for quite some time. Can we keep hold of the Northwest and the Northeast, please?" You'll have people talking about the party's uh complete collapse among Muslim voters. You'll have people giving up on Scotland and Wales. There is no clear answer. You'll have people saying, "Well, hang on. Is Andy Burden really the answer because we've just been wiped in Greater Manchester and Mercury side?" So everyone will be able to construct a negative argument. There is nobody in the Labour party making a positive argument to how they rebuild themselves as a pluralist broad-based party uh with national appeal. And I don't think anyone will be inclined to certainly not number 10. By the way, the sum of their argument is don't make it worse. It could be worse. But the problem is those Labor MPs are at counts today surrounded by angry counselors. some of whom they'll be married to, some of whom they'll employ, some of whom they'll rely on to, you know, come out on the dozen strong canvasing sessions uh that normal members won't turn up to. They'll be thinking, well, hang on, you know, what could be worse than this? And that's the argument KMA will need to win over the next 48 hours. You make an interesting point, Patrick, that Labour has done so badly or reform has done so well in the Greater Manchester region that it would be quite a risk now for Andy Burnham to stand down as mayor and and find a bi-election in the region. Labour could end up losing the bi-election and control of Greater Manchester. So, it's a bit of a setback for Mr. Burn on these results as well as Mr. Starmer. Standing back, Patrick, would it be right to say that the the the the systemic significance of these elections is that in a sense Labor is now going the way of the Tories? It's been a while now since the Tories could claim to be a national party. It's more a party of various regions and Labor is now becoming a party of various regions, specifically some cities, some metropolitan areas. But Labor too now is not a national party. >> Yes. And and that is the problem. The old adage was that Labour was the party of Hamster and Hull. You know, we haven't had the results from the London Burough or Camden yet, but on this evidence, it could quite possibly be neither. And that invites the question of where it is the party of. Look, the Tories have not had a good night. They're not going to have a good day. But at least if you are a Tory, if you are Kem Benar, you can look at the results and you know you might not look at your own constituency in Essics which has just swung to reform in a major way but you might say look we have a coherent albeit small electoral coalition. We are the party of older richer voters and at least gives us something to work with and build from. If you are K star you look at this and think what is the Labour party? Who is it for? And that is a question that I think people is too big for people to confront. You know, we'll have a lot of displacement activity about multi-party politics which is obviously a big factor. Karma's leadership uh their inheritance, but it is as fundamental as that. Who is the who is the Labour party for? I think the answer is less clear than who the Tories Tories are representing. And and finally, Patrick, before we let you go, it is incredible when you step back and think, it was just nearly two years ago when Kia Starmer won that landslide for Labor. It may have been a loveless landslide, but it was still a big big majority. I mean, how many, and I don't mean literally, but how many Labour MPs really believe Kama will lead them into the next election? >> Uh, I'd say a vanishingly small number. You could perhaps count it on the fingers of one hand. I think you know there is a growing realization even among Karma's small band of personal loyalists that that prospect is probably uh receding from view quite rapidly. The best Karma can hope for is an exit on his own terms perhaps in a year perhaps in 18 months but I think as at a bare minimum in the coming days you know we've had mayors and MPs saying this already with varying degrees of diplomacy. Karma is going to have to indicate that he at least accepts that's a possibility and not an inevitability. >> Okay. Well, we will discuss handover and the like shortly, but Patrick McGuire, chief political commentator at the times. Thank you very much for joining us. Ahead, more reaction to the May 2026 election results with the political editor of the Times. This is Andrew Neil and Joe Coburn with the 2026 elections live. Let's speak now to the Times political editor Steve Swinford. He joins us now. Steve, first of all, what what's Labour saying as about what we know so far as to how bad these results are? >> I mean, people are pretty depressed internally as you you imagine. What there isn't is there isn't a a state of shock. I think they knew that they were going to be bad, but they're taking it deeply personally. It's very upsetting for them. The interesting thing, Andrew, that I'm not picking up yet at the moment. I'm not picking up anyone going over the top. I'm told that Andy Burnham is unlikely to make any major intervention this weekend. We're not expecting anything other than something brief and supportive from Wes Streeting. The one I haven't got an idea on yet is Angela Raina, but at the moment, people are kind of we're somewhere between a rock and a hard place. Everyone is saying that it's awful, that it's terrible, and it is disastrous, which is obviously true, historically bad, but at the same time, no one is moving. >> As the afternoon goes on and into the evening, uh, Steven, isn't it likely to get worse? I mean, we know that Labor has no chance in Wales now. It's going to lose Wales. May even come third or potentially fourth in Wales. And it could even come third in Scotland. Certainly won't come first there, too. the news will just get worse as the day goes on. >> And the one thing worth remembering is this is a very London centric party. So I think it's got something like 50 of the MPs plus in London. Um and as a result when those results fall and they're going to come around a lot around 7:00 and they are expected to be really bad. You're going to see the Greens make massive inroads into Labour's vote. Um and that is going to have a psychological impact on a lot of senior MPs including one Kia Starmer including David Lammy. So lots of the cabinet big beasts have a base in London and they are going to suddenly feel under threat on it. I was I was talking to to one minister who's got a northern sea and they were saying they had a conversation with one of their colleagues in London recently. That colleague in London was saying I just can't believe it. My voters are melting away before my very eyes. And they said to them well that's all right for you to say but that's been happening in my backyard for a very long time now. So uh yeah it's um it's it's going to be a big psychological impact. >> Well on that psychological impact Stephen uh you will remember we have spoken many times about the actual reality of losing parts of the country that you have held for decades in some cases uh a century in in sense of Wales. London seen perhaps as you rightly say the sort of final bastion of Labour support a Labor city. Um, would that change the dial if they are as bad as predicted? If the Greens really do as well as they hope for, will that change the calculus at Westminster? >> I think it will. Look, we we had a really extraordinary story on the front page of the times this morning, which was that Ed Meliband had had a private meeting with Kier Starmmer and he had suggested that he should set out a timeline for his departure. Now, that is a big moment on any reckoning. It wasn't denied by Star. it isn't denied by Milliband and obviously Starmmer has given his answer. He's very clearly said today I will not walk away but I think where you'll get is you get an incredibly wounded injured Star emerging from this it it obviously is unsustainable and has to come to a head at some point. they will give him the grace of obviously next week Monday he's got this big reset speech planned this cabinet on Tuesday seeing the LP but either way I think that the the knives are very clearly going to be out for him >> right and that speech I mean what can he possibly say in that speech >> I mean you could go really radical and kind of rip up some of the manifesto red lines but it is worth saying this is Karma that we are talking about so let's take Brexit he's going to make the case for closer alignment but what won't be doing is ripping up the red line on no return to the customs union, no return to the single market, no return to free movement. So because Karma is inherently quite an incrementalist politician, he does things bit by bit and that means that it's probably not going to be big enough to ensure his survival. There are some people in number 10 who think he really needs to go maximist. He just needs to throw the kitchen sink at this to survive. But K star in his way is just saying no I will continue I just need to go kind of further and faster on delivery. But the problem is that that might all look very much like what we've already seen from K star and we get a continuation of of of that which is being you know gone down very badly with voters today. >> I I do wonder Steve what kind of world politicians live in if they think a speech about closer alignment to EU rules is going to turn things around. I mean, what planet are they on to think that anybody Mrs. Jones and Blackburn gives a monkeys about something like like that? What you're describing between a rock and a hard place? It sounds to me like Britain is about and Starmer is about to become uh something like the Batan Death March. Uh younger listeners, younger listeners can Google what the Batan Death March was. Let me tell them it was not a good thing. It was not a pleasant thing to to be on. But it seems to me because Labor is useless at regicide and at getting rid of leaders that are no use that it'll stumble on with a a wounded uh leader, incapable of changing partly because he's not sure he's got anybody who'd be any better anyway. >> Yeah, there is no clear alternative, Andrew. That is the point. So, so the death march, as you put it, has to continue because West Street clearly does not want to be the first mover here. Angela Raina is weighing up her options, but there are real concerns about whether she has the support of the soft left, people like Louise Hey, all of these people on the soft left, whether they would actually back her if she went over the top. And then you've got Andy Burnham. Well, huge questions about Andy Bernham because he thinks he's got a potential way back to Westminster, a seat in the offing. But you look at the results in Manchester and the Greens are making some very significant gains in Manchester already. So there is no guarantee that if there were a bi-election that Andy Bernham would win it given the dire straits that Labor are in. So every all of the rivals have potential issues against them and that means that Kharma can kind of carry on wounded damaged but still in number 10. And that feels quite likely at this point to me. >> And that seems to me, Steve, a pretty good description of the Batan death march. Except it also involved fatalities. I'm sure we'll avoid that. Steve, thanks for joining us. A busy day for you. Steve Swinford there, political editor of the Times.