Prime Minister Saky Starmmer has told
the BBC he gets the frustration felt by
the public over the pace of change since
Labour's landslide general election
victory more than a year ago. On the day
MPs from all parties returned to
Westminster after their summer recess,
he said his priority was, in his words,
delivery, delivery, and delivery, and
that his government was moving on to its
second phase, having laid the
foundations of what he wants to achieve.
Well, he accused his political critics
of thriving on grievance, singling out
Nigel Farage's Reform UK as having no
interest in solving problems, but
pressed on immigration levels into the
UK and the issue of hotels housing
asylum seekers, he conceded he wouldn't
want one in his own town or street and
would like to close them sooner than the
end of this parliamentary term. Have a
listen.
I want to see every single asylum hotel
closed. The way to do that is in an
orderly way um that actually gets the
cases done. Not and here's the big
divide
because you put to me Nigel Fra the
difference here is between an orderly
sensible way of actually fixing a
problem we inherited from the Tories or
fanciful arrangements that just not
going to work. I mean Nigel Farage and
reform are just the politics of
grievance. They feed on grievance. They
don't want the problems solved because
they've got no reason to exist if the
problems are solved. And so the contrast
in politics is a Labor government
rebuilding, renewing the country in the
way that we said we would or this
politics of grievance that um simply
puts forward unworkable, fanciful ideas
that are actually not fair to the public
to put forward yet again ideas that just
aren't going to work. But let me take
you to one of these towns where there is
an asylum hotel. How would you feel if
it was a hotel at the end of your road?
If your daughter was having to walk past
one of these hotels every day, how would
that make you feel?
>> I completely get it. I mean, local
people by and large do not want these
hotels in their towns, in their place.
Um, and nor do I. I'm completely at one
with them on that. I'm not um in any way
um um underestimating the strength of
feeling that there is because people
strongly feel um that um these claims
should be processed. people shouldn't be
held.
>> They don't want that hotel at the end of
the road. They're trying to live their
lives. Their children, they're worried
if their children are safe.
>> Well, look, I understand why people want
the hotels closed. I want them closed
and I will work um across the board to
close them as quickly as possible. That
is my aspiration. Everyone of those
hotels closed down as quickly as
possible. Well, we the way to do that is
to work through the backlog.
>> Can you put a date on it?
>> Well, we've said we'll get rid of them
all by the end of the parliament. I'd
like four years. I'd like to bring that
forward. I think it's a good challenge.
I want to bring that forward and part of
the change in um the phasing of
government is to say what we need to do
needs to go further and faster and be
brought forward. But do I understand why
people are concerned about asylum
hotels? Absolutely I do. Do I share
their feeling that they should be closed
as soon as possible? Yes, I do. But
we've got to have a sensible way of
actually doing that.
Well, that was just part of the
interview. Ian Watson is our political
correspondent at Westminster. Ian, you
were listening to the whole thing.
Bringing forward the target to close
those asylum hotels is the headline. But
was he any more exact about the timeline
here, the exact timeline?
>> No, Matthew, he wasn't. And I think
that's what's going to concern some
Labor MPs, MPs in his own party feeling
the pressure from Reform UK. They're
behind them in the polls. they accept uh
the deadline of the end of this
parliament to exit asylum hotels. But
what they're looking for are milestones.
Looking for uh the government to be able
to say for example early next year we
will reduce the number of asylum hotels
from currently more than 200 to a more
specific figure because the government
as you know their big messages now
delivery and I think what some of their
own MPs want to see are milestones for
that delivery certainly when it comes to
asylum hotels. So they can tell a
skeptical electorate that they are
actually making progress to look out for
that progress and they've got an
alternative to some of the the much more
sweeping and if you like much more
simple solutions being put forward by
some of their political opponents
including reform UK who talk about
deportation who talk about getting out
of European and refugee conventions if
the government is going to say this will
take time step by step as K stars then
some of his own people say okay can you
set those steps out more clearly for us
he didn't do so Today
>> we heard in that interview he said he
would definitely lead the Labour party
into the next general election. What did
you make of that and also the major
shakeup in the way Downing Street is to
operate? Yeah, I think in fairness,
Matthew would probably be leading all
their bulletins if he'd said anything
other than he was going to be leading
the party into the next election if he
if he suggested perhaps it was faltering
in any way. His political opponents and
some in his own party might might
pounce. So I think he had no choice but
to but to say that but clearly he knows
he's got his work cut out in order to
stay in that position and again that
message is about delivery. What we're
seeing is there's a good minister in
charge of knocking heads together to try
to deliver on the government's
priorities but we're also seeing more
honing of those priorities. There are
five overarching missions of government
which most people can't name. So today
they're emphasizing that where they want
to see delivery is on three key issues.
One is uh of course economic growth and
living standards. Another is fixing the
National Health Service. But
interestingly, the third is securing our
borders. They recognize the resonance
that that issue has at the moment and
that has become more resonant in fact
over the summer.
>> And pulling it all together, Ian, in
terms of an overhaul around
communications, that is one thing, but
it it all boils down, doesn't it, to
policy to delivering on whatever the
promises are. And these are going to be
tough months going forward ahead of the
budget. They're going to be a very tough
month indeed, Matthew. And I think
that's partly why there is a shakeup.
But this is not the first shakeup. Of
course, his former chief of staff Sue
Gray exited. There's a previously been a
shakeup in the communications team. And
some people are saying actually is the
problem the messengers or is the problem
the message. But certainly there are uh
people there who be who be expected to
communicate better what the government's
priorities are going to be. But a big
big challenge is going to be the budget
and the need to raise taxes and which
taxes to raise which taxes will have
support from the wider public which from
Karma's own party and he's now appointed
a a a new economic adviser of his own
somebody who has a big background in
economics and academia who' worked for
the bank of England international
monetary fund van shik so he is now
effectively I think taking more advice
independently of the treasury ahead of
that big political as well as economic
event which is this autumn's budget.