The Alex Salmond Show from last night, with Peter Oborne and me:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Read more about me
If you like what I do please support me on Ko-fi using credit or debit card or PayPal
Tax Research UK Blog is written by Richard Murphy unless otherwise stated and published by Tax Research LLP under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Design by Andy Moyle
Thanks for telling us about this. We watched it last night – whatever one’s opinion about Alex Salmond, he does that increasingly rare thing of actually letting other people speak! It was therefore a sensible, intelligent and intelligible discussion. I don’t think Oborne is right about a coalition led by Starmer, though who knows. I do think you’re right about serious civil turbulence in the New Year unless the government starts getting its act together very quickly (unlikely – and probably too late anyway).
Thanks
It was fun to make – even if I had about 20 minutes notice….
It was going to be Peter alone and then they decided to make it a discussion
That was the closest thing to an ironed shirt I had….
I think people are getting distracted by the ‘noise’ of this administration dropping dead cats. The next trial of how far they can push public tolerance will be unemployment. They’ve already shown that closing parliament illegally, breaking international treaties, lying to the head of state, preposterous excuses made for aides is ‘acceptable’ to the general public.
When the population discover that having no income and find that life on ‘welfare’ is not a bed of roses coupled with Brexit chaos shortages then maybe this band of chancers will find they have met their match!
PS Richard, I watched your RT discussion and found it civilised and a refreshing change from the usual politics. Thanks.
Thanks
Not sure the point of having two commentators in complete and total agreement and and a presenter of the the ilk..a “discussion” is better served when there are counter opinions served up.
It’s true, having three anti-fascists in the room was an issue
“…having three anti-fascists in the room was an issue” 🙂
Glenn
I think you might have missed the rather powerful point that two commentators, one on the left and one on the right were in complete ageement about what a shit show this is. I think anyone denying this would have been…..well….let’s say “fake news”. Hard for any well informed person to put a positive spin on what’s happening under this government!
So let’s be clear on this, anyone who counters what you say is a “fascist”??
You said there was a problem with our agreement
I explained why we agreed
The issue seems to be yours to resolve with yourself
I think we should be allowed to hear a wide range of voices and opinions across the media. We do not get this. If a politician’s or economist’s views differ from the establishment’s view they are unlikely to appear on the BBC or other channels. That is after all the strength of propaganda. Its what we are not hearing and has been filtered out thats important. We all know that RT will be biased towards Russia but at least we get to hear another point of view.
I am not biased to wards Russie
I really rather doubt the other two are either
We recognise the issue though
Very cogent contribution Richard.
1 Didnt quite follow, about Starmer and Ireland – Labour voted against the UK internal market bill?
2 On the trade deal, there may still be a chance that the govt, in self preservation will pull back from the brink, despite the kamikazi brigade holding the reins and driving the UK chariot over the cliff. An ultra thin ‘deal’ with the EU , including another year’s transition – disguised as an ‘implementation’ period, during which we will still be abiding by single market rules etc. would not be beyond credibility given the Prime Minister’s u-turn record. Business is screaming for it….but …your apocalyptic vision after Jan 1st seems odds on.
1)Starmer should have made the issue in June – when the issue on Ireland became inevitable, IMO
2) The EU would agree another year, I have no doubt. I doubt it will be asked for
It was great to see how commentators from left and right could find common ground, but with nuance germain to each side.
This could be seen in such matters as the current mood of the Tory backbenches, the position of Starmer and the Labour Party, and, early in the second part, the economy. Richard’s detailed assessment of the chancellor’s position contrasted well with Peter’s depiction of him as Wile E Coyote running in the air! Both accounts are so true.
The agreement on the possibilities of a potentially catastrophic future rounded things up appropriately, I thought.
Lots to think about and, surprisingly, much common ground, which bodes well for the future when the current political dispensation collapses under the weight of it’s inherent contradictions, already at work in a big way.
Well Done!
Thanks
Excellent discussion by both of you. I was surprised how reasonable Peter Oborne was as I always thought of him as rather too right wing D Telegraph proponent. Salmond is certainly a good interviewer – what a contrast to the US presidential last Tuesday! The question of whether Covid or the economy (or Brexit for that matter) is the most salient problem at the moment is difficult. If Covid gets out of control this is a disaster and if the economy tanks in November (which does seem likely unless Sunak does implement more supportive policies) will be too.
I answered in the context of Johnson and parliament
Peter did more broadly
Both are valid views
Great commentary from both of you.
Thanks
I by no means always agree with Peter but he is good to talk to
Tory party – rule of law – blah blah. Yawn.
2010 – 2015 – 130,000 dead due to (an uneccessary) austerity – so that would be 130,000 leaglly dead & thus OK.
66,000 dead March to now – due to (legal?) incompetence. & that’s OK – cos it’s all legit – even though multi-million contracts let with no tender
Cos the tory party supports………the rule of law.
I have heard some burbuling bullshit in my time – but the tory party and the “rule of law” don’t make me laugh – another ficticious fig leaf that tory-scum (& that is what they are) hide behind. They support the “rule of law” when it suits them. It is a propaganda device. Shame of Oborne for mentioning it.
Glenn Matlock? The bassist in the Sex Pistols?
I was wondering that too…
Hi Richard
Whilst I am a follower of you, I always read Peter Oborne in Middle East Eye. I do not always agree with everything he says but you can always see his point of view and agree to disagree with him.
I also admired his principled stand in resigning from the Telegraph some years ago.
Your discussion with all 3 of you was well worth the watching. I also just watched the Panorama programme on Money Laundering and UK banks. Words fail me on that
Best Wishes
Thanks
Thank you for that Richard. Some commenters object to the lack of ‘a range voices’; a curious claim when all we hear in Britain is the endless chattering, bile-ridden klaxon of right wing media, and divisive, menacing and incompetent neoliberal ideology. This was a genuine discussion of ideas, with the object of exploring understanding.
I have rarely found the labels ‘left’ and ‘right’ particularly informative, revealing or even useful. The breadth of agreement between you, Richard and Peter Oborne I confess somehow did not come as a great surprise to me. The real core of the division between you and Oborne in that discussion – was the Union.
I have not studied Oborne, and do not know how systematic his ideas are, but from the fragments I have read or gleaned, I associate his ideas with a very old source: the stock mythological imperium of the British Isles as a political rather than geographical entity; a quasi-Galfridian fantasy spun seductively by Edmund Spenser (1552/3-1599), with a nod to Llwyd and Dee that has always managed to capture the anxious imagination particularly of English political intellectuals, of whatever hue.
Great show! What’s interesting about this is how much better than most of the BBC’s politics output it is. Alex Salmond is not everyone’s cup of tea but he does a perfectly good job here, asking interesting questions without getting in the way of the respondents. You were great Richard, as was Peter Oborne: for my money he’s the best UK commentator on the right of the political spectrum.
Thanks Howard