– English Lyrics

Lyrics & Translation

[English]

This week, Kier Starmer gets tough on

Nigel Farage.

He doesn't like Britain. Doesn't believe

in Britain. Wants you to doubt it just

as much as he does.

He delivers one of his greatest hits,

but with a twist.

People like my dad. I think by now you

know what he did for a living.

And Chris Mason's dentist resigns in

disgust at his eating habits at Labour

Party conference.

Well, that's brave.

This is like an ASMR video.

We will discuss all of that and what

else we learned this week on this

episode of Newscast.

Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio

and Chris in the studio.

Fisel in the newscast studio.

And please welcome Professor Jane Green

who has got many job titles. I'll read

them out. Director of Nfield Politics

Research Center at Oxford and president

of the British Poland Council.

Oh, you missed a few, but thank you very

much.

You're in a band. And you're in a band.

The risk register.

Exactly. Um, can we download your

material?

Uh, not quite yet.

Okay. Not that big.

Okay. Right. But let's focus on let's

focus on your political analysis for

this episode.

Okay. That sounds good.

Um, and I should say we did an episode

of Newscast the podcast which you can

listen to on BBC Sounds now with the

latest from the terror incident in

Manchester. So, we have been keeping an

eye on that. But in this episode, we're

going to look back at some of the

political events of the week because

Chris, you and I spent half of it in

Liverpool at the Labor Party conference.

Yeah. How do you think Kier Starmer has

emerged from that?

I think speaking to those around him and

indeed speaking to him there, he's

pleased that they have focused their

pitch, if you like, their political

pitch on reform. The prime minister has

been getting a lot of heat privately

from some pretty senior figures around

him saying it was the the Labor offer

was still still too fuzzy in their view,

particularly up against Nigel Farage,

who paints in the most primary of of

colors. We've seen a buildup to this

argument in terms of Labour making the

case that their real opponents are

reform rather than the Conservatives

which they kept labeling as irrelevant.

Uh but it came together I think in that

in that conference speech speaking to

folk since that speech uh those who

welcomed it say that's good but will he

stick to it? Uh because you know you

don't change the political narrative in

one speech. Most people miss most of

what politicians do most of the time. In

other words, does he keep prosecuting

that argument in the next six to nine

months, particularly in the countdown to

the elections in Scotland and Wales and

indeed locally in England next May? Um,

and to what and to what effect? And the

sharpening of the language I think was

particularly particularly striking, not

least the round that then bubbled up

with Nigel Farage and reform about

exactly that.

Um, Jane, you spend your whole life

crunching data about how the electorate

think about things. What data will

number 10 Downing Street have crunched

to help them inform that conference

speech that he gave?

Oh, that's a fascinating question, Adam,

because I've been wondering if they are

crunching the same data as us because

our analysis of voting behavior and

defections from Labor, so people that

voted Labor in 2024 and no longer intend

to vote Labor, tells a kind of two-prong

story. One is that Labour's vote is

splintering in all directions, but the

smallest proportion is to reform. So

before the conference, one had to wonder

why they were going for reform voters so

much. That's not about the attack on

reform, but that's just about which

voters are they most worried about. And

I think there might have been assumption

that they could almost rely on the left

to sort of rally around Labor again if

they see reform as the main threat. So

that's clearly one of the things that

they're thinking,

but it was curious how much they looked

like they were going for reform voters

because that's really tricky for Labor.

The other risk with all of this and it

is high risks you know but then

obviously you've got to make a choice

and frankly you can't ignore Farage and

you can't ignore the polls but the other

big risk is that Conservative voters are

still leaving the Conservative party.

Now that is extraordinary because I mean

it's not extraordinary when you think

about the context but if historically

you don't normally see the main

opposition party losing support when the

governing part is losing support. So,

Conservative voters are still switching

to reform and Conservative voters were

switching to reform between 2019 and

2024. So, that's a cumulative loss on

the right. Now, if you then tell

everybody because obviously Labor is not

just talking to Labor voters, they're

talking to everyone. If you tell

conservative voters reform is the main

opposition on party on the right, then

perhaps reform looks like the viable

party to choose rather than the

conservatives. That's very bad for

Labor. Very, very bad for Labor because

Labor can lose so many constituencies

just because Conservative voters move to

reform in greater numbers. And it is

interesting because actually when you're

in Labour Party conference in the hall

and surrounded by Labor activists, you

sort of feel like it's a message to

Labor activists and okay, you're

constantly thinking about the rest of

the country because we're going to

interpret it on the 6 and 10:00 news and

the Today program, but when you're in

there, you the thing that's in front of

you is the activists cheering the

messages.

I think I sometimes forget that he is

speaking to the whole country at that

point.

I mean, he's hoping to, right? Like I

mean, he's hoping that someone's

listening. I think Chris is absolutely

right. You know, we can obsess about a

speech and it's really important. It

tells us about the direction and the

strategy and the intentions, but the

real test, the proof of the pudding is

whether it gets outside of the

conference hall and whether it's

repeated and whether it's prosecuted

over and over and over again. Um, but

there was such a lot that was in that

speech that also was for the left. And I

think

that was what was fascinating that for

so there were two kind of vacuums,

weren't there? one was this vacuum over

kind of oh there's a lot of racism and

racist language and things are being

normalized here and nobody else is

saying anything about this on the left

of politics to try to counter that. So I

think that was one of the things that he

was trying to do. The other one was of

course give people on the left a reason

to vote for them. And I think that does

speak to what we see in our analysis and

it's not just our analysis of British

election study data. Of course you see

it in polling right across the piece

that Labour's vote was splintering from

the left and Labour's biggest losses are

still to undecided. So they really

needed and I still think this is un I'm

still very unclear about this. They

really needed to give people a sense of

what labor was for. And it's not I mean

you know is labor for tolerance and

economic growth. I wouldn't say economic

growth is the thing that people worried

about the most. I think it's their own

finances, their own worries about their

own financial well-being, cost of living

and everything else. Well, and and

people don't link the economy as a whole

growing to their own personal

circumstances getting

I mean I often think and forgive me for

saying this but I often think well if I

think something's nuanced and I'm an

academic and I'm meant to do nuance

then I'm not sure that you know somebody

who's not like me is going I mean it was

a very nuanced argument about how growth

translates into you know people's kind

of daily lives and in our own analysis

we we've been running some um additional

surveys with the Joseph Roundry

Foundation absolutely fascinating

economic growth is the is the top thing

that people don't understand as well.

Okay. So if you ask like how's you know

GDP, how's the economic growth going?

That's the one with the highest

proportion of people that saying I don't

know

right

you know what I know is how I feel about

the cost of living how I feel about

inflation and prices and you know people

are more willing to talk about

and there wasn't a lot about the cost of

living in Star speech there was one one

line wasn't there when he talked about

like the things that make life good like

going out for a meal or having a a trip

somewhere. Yeah. And he does mention

economic security which was a personal

moment for me but because it's something

I've been talking about for absolutely

yonks now you know the importance of

this.

Um and fisel I suppose you would be

watching Rachel Reeves' speech as much

as Karma's speech for clues about the

economy and do we have

do we get any clues for the next few

months?

I want to pick up some of what Jane

said. I think I think what I heard there

which I wondered why we haven't had this

earlier was this attempt to inject some

degree of optimism in a world

politically we've talked about this

before w where there's a lot of doomism

doom and gloom some of it came from the

government itself just over a year ago

uh and I think from their perspective it

hasn't really stopped they expect you

know and not just for political purposes

I'd imagine where they want people to

feel a little bit better about about

things. Interest rates have been cut.

Um, real income, so that's after

inflation have started to go up. No boom

here. But like certainly when they're

going down, that's a bad thing, right?

So the absence of that bad thing is

good. The absence of a sort of fiscal

crisis, a mini budget style situation is

is also good. But some sense of

optimism, we can see in some of the

economic statistics, this downtrodden

vibe is having an impact. People's

savings rates are high. They're in

double digit over 10% was the latest

figure that came out just this week and

that is what we sort of associate with

pandemic level stress. So people are a

bit worried about the economy and given

we've had five interest rate cuts, given

that real incomes are growing, given

that the economy has been growing even

if people don't feel it so much.

Um consumer confidence and things like

that are lagging behind. And so I

thought it was very I thought I'd hear

it more from the chancellor. We heard a

bit of it from the chancellor. Then the

prime minister really went for it on

this sort of optimistic tale of what

Britain

can be.

Oh, so all that stuff about like, oh,

Britain's a great country cuz the people

that chop the oranges at halftime for

their kids football match, that was

actually intended to like stimulate a

feel-good factor that makes people go

out and spend money.

And I'm

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You're making a very

sort of direct punch through argument

there. But yeah, in a sense,

I haven't heard them say that to me. But

I when I when I when I put together some

of the things holding the economy back

the economy should be doing better given

the interest rate cuts. We should see

consumer confidence ticking up. It has

not ticked up. There's some very

interesting analysis saying that some of

this might be attached to people's

political beliefs particularly amongst

the over 50s where there's a really that

is the that is the central part of low

consumer confidence is the over 50s. And

is there something to do with political

beliefs about the country being rubbish?

Basically, even though things are very

stressed for younger people, in fact,

their consumer confidence has gone up

with their incomes. So, I think I I

detect there could have been a conscious

strategy to g people up a little bit.

I'm also conscious of the return of the

b- word, Brexit. You think about Jane's

analysis of who they're trying to win

with this strategy. I was very struck in

the interviews by the prime minister in

Rachel Reef's speech. This thing about

the youth scheme with Europe really

leaning in to Brexit having not worked.

I'll just put it like that in a way they

maybe wouldn't have done before the

election because they didn't want to

offend those reform voters. Right.

I think Yeah. I I think there's

something in that. Not least because I

think they realize that they cannot they

cannot sharpen a political argument with

reform and then walk past the question

of Brexit. I think coupled with the fact

I think they've been inclined to want to

do it for a while and have just been

trying to find the the space to do it.

Just picking up on your point about the

optimism and the oranges. There's an

overlap here. No, no, the oranges thing

is is an interesting part of this

because I think there's an overlap. We I

think we mentioned this on newscast the

other day, Adam. So firstly, I think

there was an awareness that they did

want to sound more optimistic, but

didn't want to fall into the trap that

they felt that Rishi Sunnak occasionally

fell into, which was to seize upon a

particular bit of economic data and and

this is to caricature what he would have

done, but to to to the the political

danger of overdoing the positive if

people are feeling negative. Mhm.

But I think where the overlap with the

oranges comes in and indeed the image

from Shroptshire, the rolling English

countryside of Shroptshire, which later

which is this image that popped up all

around uh the conference center in

Liverpool was this articulation that

they were attempting to find around how

they see patriotism

uh in in this era where there is contest

around flags and we saw the Union flag

and indeed the flags of the UK nations

very prominently in the audience uh

during the prime minister of speech. So

I think there's an overlap there. I

think that the the the that to to to

overdo seizing on that quarter of orange

is to both lean into a sense of optimism

but also identity and belonging and who

we are and and and I think the word that

neatly encapsulate both encapsulates

both of those is pride. That's what they

were trying to get to.

You know this I think you know this

question about mentioning Brexit. It's

partly because people have come to the

conclusion that Brexit hasn't worked for

many people. It's partly because

Labour's voters are overwhelmingly those

voters who either voted remain or would

againain. Um but it's also something

else, isn't it? It's there's two things

I think. One is people just didn't want

to go there again.

Completely.

Um they didn't want to go there again.

So imagine framing another general

election campaign as a little bit like

that one. you know, where you've got

kind of the same guy Nigel Farage on the

Brexit side promising a load of stuff

just as in Brexit that a lot of that did

not happen and then you've got this kind

of binary choice. I mean, that's how I

kind of almost think about the next

explain something that I'd find a bit

mysterious. The weekend before Labour

Party conference where Rachel Reeves's

big interview, the centerpiece in the

Times was the youth mobility scheme with

the EU which has already been announced,

not actually negotiated with the EU, but

we knew a version of it was coming. And

that's the thing that she sort of

splashed on and then ministers were

talking about a lot those those days

around it. I'm like why? But now I

understand why.

Well well well there's the dividing line

politically. Economically, they hope

that it will unlock a return of serve

from the Europeans that can open up some

economic wins. For example, getting rid

of almost all checks on food imports and

exports. Prime Minister said that that

in some of his interviews that that

would be a win for food prices, help uh

British manufacturing industry um be

part of uh consortia that are bidding

for the massive boom now in rearming

Europe. um there's going to be tens of

billions, hundreds of billions. You want

British manufacturers at the heart of

that at the minute we're not allowed to

be part of these consortium

that is open as a negotiating point that

will have been heard in Brussels. Now

there's also now traditionally we may

have said only a year ago we would have

said well then there's all sorts of like

are you getting too close to to

Brussels? Is that going to offend the

reform voters? Are they going to go

there? And I just note uh Mr. Bernham

popping up in in a in a and saying he

thought we were going to rejoin in his

lifetime, which he you never would have

got a senior Labor figure even going

there a year ago.

And Bernham was saying a lot.

No, he was saying a lot. But I'm just

saying like the dynamic if this is if

this is a new dynamic if I wrong. If

we're right,

then coming up on that side of the

Labour party, which is where the

action's going to be for the government,

becomes a bit of a competition. And do

you get the same as happened for the

Tories

in the last decade happened to Labor

being outflanked

and and Chris this is I mean this is a

ridiculous question to ask because I

don't know how you can't peer into like

Kstarmmer's brain directly but he's

under a lot of fire. We had that sort

he's very unpopular in the polls

although we could talk about whether

everyone is always going to be that

unpopular in the rest of time when the

the next 10 prime ministers are going to

be unpopular. He'd just seen Andy

Burnham come along and sort of like make

a tilt for the crown. You sat down for

an interview with him after you've done

this conference speech. Like how did he

seem? And I know you can't read too much

into like how someone seems, but I'm

just intrigued like how does he wear all

of this?

I think he was chipper and relieved. I

mean I spoke to him within about half an

hour, 40 minutes of him finishing the

speech. The adrenaline was probably

pumping through him. Um but I think he

he felt pretty chipper. I think he felt

and those around him felt pretty chipper

that the nature of how the whole Andy

Burnham thing played out meant that it

actually served to rally a lot of the

parliamentary Labour party behind Kasama

even though a lot of them are very alive

what they see as his weaknesses and

there was the thing I came around away

with politically from the whole

conference was was a sense of how deep

wide and senior questions run about

whether he's the best frontman for the

the job they've set themselves which is

taking on reform. Yeah, because all of

us speculating about the prime minister

being replaced at one point. Like we all

do that. Like cabinet ministers aren't

normally meant to do that with

journalists

and and privately uh they are.

It's as it's as simple as that. Now that

doesn't mean things will change

instantly. It may also mean that things

blow over because you know party

conferences in particular are sort of

febal places of political gossip. Um but

um but that is being talked about uh by

people from the cabinet uh down

particularly in the context of what

happens next summer after those

elections in May and where Labor and

Reform and indeed others uh but where

those two parties are by then. Um, and

Fisel, I saw you posted on social media

on X, formerly known as Twitter, that

when um, Nick Robinson had interviewed K

Starmer the next day, the the bit you

picked out was Starr saying, "Oh, I'm

looking at how much we're spending on

sickness benefits. And I'm looking at

how much is being spent on young people

with mental health conditions. And I'm

wondering if maybe that money might be

spent better on treatment and support

for people with mental health conditions

as opposed to just cash handouts in the

form of benefits." What do you think

that signals? Well, and he said he was

looking at it, too. So, obviously the

context to this is that they had a

little tilt at welfare cuts. Let's call

them cuts. They called it reform, but it

was cuts. And then they retreated,

delayed. And I've never thought that

their appetite to try and do something

in this area has gone away.

I think I think what we have seen since

uh the summer has been a reframing of

the argument to say, well, what we will

do is reform. And he used the phrase

moral argument. So the moral argument

won't be that we need to save the money.

The moral argument will be it is a

disgrace that young people go straight

from college or university and are on

benefits related to mental health

because at that point the best medicine

as they would see it would be to be in a

workplace or training or something like

that

and then have a career. If you're on

benefits, he use this statistic, there

is a significant likelihood that you

could be on benefits for life if you're

then in the early 20s. So you make that

argument,

you then find some money to invest,

you've got to invest in the mental

health services

and then you save money on the welfare

bill. But what does that actually mean?

The end part of that is does that mean

actually taking those benefits away from

young people? Does it mean treating the

benefit system differently for mental

health versus physical health? Then you

get into some Well, over to Chris at

none of this is imminent, Chris, because

Steven Tims, the minister, is doing this

big review as a result of the failure to

pass the welfare reforms from earlier on

in the year. So, actually, there's

probably still another year of working

this out.

Yeah, I think that's probably broadly

right. Um, they're definitely determined

to have another go. You could see that

in the signaling when Pat McFaden was

sent to be working pension secretary in

the reshuffle. But also speaking to very

senior folk, they are going to have

another go. They acknowledged that they

got the politics badly wrong last time

because all of the focus was on saving

money rather than making that that moral

that moral argument as the as the prime

minister put it. I think also into the

mix is the movement that's going to come

on the two child benefit cap relatively

soon, next couple of months, probably at

the budget. Quite what that amounts to

is still in the works. Is there some

sort of tapering? Does it go to three

children? How do they pay for it?

Significantly expensive. Prime

Minister's always argued it's something

he wanted to do but felt that he

couldn't afford. Obviously, that's a

choice, but that was how he

he framed it. I did put it to someone

quite senior in government the other

day. I said, "If you move on the two

child benefit cap, given how how much

desire there is within the party that

that happens, does that buy you goodwill

around other changes?" And this person

who's been around the block a bit and

was mildly cynical said, "Now they just

swallow that and still argue about about

the other stuff. But I think I think

they will try and

use a movement on that with arguments

around the nature of the budget which is

which are unavoidable I think in a sort

of physical context into the short and

medium term. Not least remember those

changes they couldn't get through were

about slowing the rate of the increase

in the in the benefits bill because of

the projected number of people going on

to it.

So I think they'll they'll repackage the

argument. There'll be some things that

will uh serve they hope to persuade some

of the skeptics before. Um but it'll be

a tussle again because it's not an easy

thing for for a Labor government to do.

Uh then let's turn our attention to the

Conservatives. I only discovered today

that actually their conferences in

Manchester. I thought I was going to go

to Birmingham. So I'm glad glad I

checked. Thanks BBC Verify. Um uh and

we'll talk about the Conservatives on

newscast the podcast quite a lot in the

next few days and probably next week

once the conference is all wrapped up

and it's all happened. But Jane, the

thing that was announced today by Chem

Bedon is that she would repeal the

Climate Change Act, which is this

previous Labor government era piece of

legislation, which was supported by lots

of the other parties at the time that

set up the independent climate change

committee that had these binding climate

change targets for for each parliament

and kind of like defines what what we do

as a country about about getting to net

zero eventually. Um, do you think chemoc

has done that just because she just

doesn't like it and it's sort of that's

her personal thing or does she think

there's actually some electoral

advantage to doing something like this?

Wow. I mean Chris, you know, you got the

question is of what was in Karma's head

and can have the question of what's in

bed. Um, but the deeper issue here,

isn't it? Is like Kem Benedok is really

struggling to have cut through. She's

really struggling within the party, let

alone outside the party. And it's

extraordinary actually to be honest that

this would be the thing. I mean, it's

not going to be the thing that she's

going to spend the whole of conference

talking about. And we'll have to wait to

see. But fundamentally, the Conservative

party is trying to figure out if they're

a party that goes harder on the right or

whether they they shouldn't do that. And

that is amazing when you think, you

know, is this a party that sees itself

as the natural party of opposition or is

it a party that's vying for voters on

the fringes of British politics? And if

you just looked at that one statement

alone, you would say, well, this is a

this is a leader who thinks that she

needs to be on the fringes,

right?

Um not in the mainstream what people are

worried about.

The majority of voters are actually in

favor of something like the climate

change act.

Yes. and also that the majority of

voters aren't thinking about the climate

change act. They want to see a party in

opposition that is a potential credible

alternative government that's talking

about public services, cost of living,

the things that people really care

about. And you know what I've been told

and you know I'm an academic and I study

analysis and evidence but um you know

but the little bits of things that I

hear about Cammy Benedarch is that she's

particularly comfortable on these sort

of culture wars kinds of issues. Now,

the environment's not traditionally a

culture wars issues, but it's it's not

your sort of traditional leftright

breadandbut economics

and that she's veered away from those

kinds of breadandbut economic issues.

And and you know what she's been saying

is, well, people aren't going to look at

us now, so we need to take a pause and

come up with things and do a deep kind

of stock take and all the rest of it and

come out later. Now, that would be a bit

of a bold thing to say in normal

political times.

In political times when there is a party

on the right that is gobbling up half of

your vote, I mean, their vote has

literally halved and gone to reform in

the last year.

She doesn't have time.

She can't do that. I mean, that's just,

you know, that is just too little too

late. So, um I think she's missing

opportunities or the conservatives are

missing opportunities and not frankly

understanding the depth of their

difficulties.

Um the thing I'll be most interested to

see and feel actually feel is a better

word is and I know this is one of the

cliches of party conference season but

the sort of mood of the party at this

conference because last year the

conservative conference had had a sort

of survivors elation vibe to it. It was

quite upbeat

and the leadership contest which meant

there was a bit of excitement.

The leadership contest gave it a sense

of purpose and activists felt almost

like uh they had their conference back

because there was far few kind of

corporate lobbyists around and all that

kind of stuff.

We were seeing labor struggle and

thought they would be the natural

beneficiaries.

Yes. Because exactly Labour had had a

bumpy start. All the rouse about passes

for glasses and all that stuff of a of a

year ago. They were having a battle of

ideas which any member of a political

party tends to love. Um, so how's it

going to feel for them this year when

they've gone backwards from a dire

position? Yeah.

Um, and you know, they're not in they're

not in a internal contest. I mean, I

think the way I interpret Kami Benedo's

approach both to the climate change act

to this review that she set up to look

into the European Convention on Human

Rights, which we're expecting to

conclude and for her to decide that the

party will advocate withdrawal, is that

this is authentic bayonoism or whatever.

you know, this is this is how this is

this is her this is how she believes

politics should be done. She's making an

argument that says that hers is the only

truly conservative party. So she argues

that reform are as she would see it

fiscally incontinent throwing lots of

money around in terms of some of their

spending uh commitments. Reform would

obviously push back on that but that's

her uh political argument. But you know

the evidence suggests at the moment it's

it's not working. I think it's also true

to say historically, certainly in

contemporary history, there's never been

a harder time to lead the Conservative

party. And I and I would say on on the

this argument about climate change, I

think that the conservatives would would

bet that it is going to become an

economic issue or they're trying to make

it an economic issue and a cost of

living issue because we're now at the

stage where the sorts of changes in the

transition will start affecting ordinary

households whether it's the heat pump or

cladding or your electric vehicle. These

are decisions made by consumers that

governments have to make and I question

this will be a real test of the

government. Are they willing to push

against on this hard enough to almost

force householders to change their

homes?

How much resistance are you going to get

from that? There's a lot of political uh

potential uh benefits. Is this going to

be like a giant version of do you

remember the Oxbridge bi-election after

Boris Johnson resigned as an MP thing

boiled down to like the ultra low

emission zone and what exactly I'm not

saying it's going to work necessarily

but you can see the calculation and and

the question for me is how far do they

go because you have reform saying things

like you know writing letters to the

guys bidding on the wind farm contracts

saying we will rip these up which is a

frankly extraordinary thing for an

opposition party that aspires to

government to say we're going to rip up

contracts Now,

is there some sort of Dutch auction here

between the Conservatives and reformer

as to how far they go along this path?

I think there's a bit of that and I

think just to ex extend your thought one

further on is that some conservatives

anticipate with some of these targets

getting quite real in terms of they're

no longer on the horizon. They are much

more imminent. That the government may

so they calculate uh reach a point where

they think is this doable? Is it

practical? is it politically viable? And

then they might be able to say, "Look,

well, we we spotted this coming." But

then, who knows?

So much to talk about for the next 35

years. Um, now talking about horizons,

Chris, you mentioned this picture of the

rolling hills in Shropshire that was all

over the Labor Party conference. We

discovered where it was. It's in a place

that I thought was called Rattling Hope,

but we had a message from newscaster

David who lives there and says it's

actually pronounced ratchup

even though it is written for a really

long time and I didn't know that.

Always learning. Always learn

as in you you didn't know that's how it

was pronounced or you not heard of the

place.

That was how it was.

Yeah. Ratch up. And he says, "David, the

drive or walk over the Stretton Hills

from there to Carding Mill Valley is

highly recommended." And that's two

other places I probably mispronounced.

No, you did fine on Cardinal Valley.

Thank you very much. And thanks for

coming into the studio, Jane.

Thanks for having me.

Nice to see you, Fisel.

Great to be

and Chris, I'll see you in Manchester.

Manchester.

Key Vocabulary

Vocabulary	Meanings
speech /spiːtʃ/ A2	noun - a formal talk given to an audience
party /ˈpɑːrti/ A1	noun - a political group or group of people
conference /ˈkɒnfərəns/ B1	noun - a formal meeting for discussion
voters /ˈvəʊtəz/ B1	noun - people who vote in elections
government /ˈɡʌvənmənt/ B1	noun - the group of people who govern a country
reform /rɪˈfɔːm/ B2	verb - to make changes to improve something noun - a change that improves something
economy /ɪˈkɒnəmi/ B1	noun - the system of making and trading things of value
election /ɪˈlɛkʃən/ B1	noun - the process of choosing a leader or government
brexit /ˈbrɛksɪt/ C1	noun - the UK's exit from the European Union
optimism /ˈɒptɪmɪzəm/ B2	noun - hopefulness about the future
data /ˈdeɪtə/ B1	noun - information collected for analysis
risk /rɪsk/ A2	noun - the possibility of something bad happening
emergent /ɪˈmɜːdʒənt/ C1	adjective - coming into existence or prominence
focus /ˈfəʊkəs/ B1	verb - to concentrate attention on something noun - the main point of attention
rally /ˈræli/ B2	verb - to bring people together for support
striking /ˈstraɪkɪŋ/ B2	adjective - attracting attention due to unusualness
splintering /ˈsplɪntərɪŋ/ C1	adjective - breaking into small pieces or dividing
patriotic /ˌpeɪtriˈɒtɪk/ B2	adjective - showing love and support for one's country
mood /muːd/ B1	noun - the feeling or atmosphere of a situation
credible /ˈkrɛdəbəl/ B2	adjective - able to be believed or trusted