Upstream with River X | EP019: Inside BFA Global Investors – Private Assets, Innovation & Long-Term Thinking

Is there anything better than your team bringing home a W? How about a personal W for your health? If you're 45 or older at an average risk, it's time to screen for colon cancer. Now the number one cancer killer of people under 50 in the US. It's easy to put off when screening feels like a hassle, but Colorguard Plus makes it simple. It's not invasive, requires no prep, can be completed at home in about 15 minutes and is 95% effective. Talk to your healthcare provider or request Colorguard Plus online, RX only. - Hey, it's Adam Grant from Ted's podcast, rethinking with Adam Grant. This episode is sponsored by Am Better Health. If you run a business or work with employers on benefits, you know the story. Group health insurance costs keep climbing and the plan's rarely fit everyone's needs. There's a newer model worth knowing about called an ICRA, which lets employers set a contribution and employees choose their own health plan based on their doctor's budget and what actually works for them. Healthcare isn't a group decision, so why should coverage be? Get coverage you control. Find out if an ICRA is right for you at ambetterhealth.com. - This episode is sponsored by Hagen. Hagen turns a script, photo or presentation into a polished video of you. In minutes, no camera or crew required. It's how real estate agents, financial advisors, attorneys and creators show up consistently on every feed and build a brand that brings in clients without spending their whole week making content. Rated the number one AI video platform for small businesses on G2 with the most realistic AI avatars in the industry, trusted by a community of over 30 million people and 85% of the Fortune 100 and built to work in over 175 languages. So you can reach your audience in theirs. Here's a wild part. Record yourself for just 15 seconds and Hagen builds an AI avatar that makes professional videos for you on demand. So you can post everywhere your audience is. As yourself, without filming every time. Your first three videos are free at hagen.com/pod. That's h-e-y-g-e-n.com/p-o-d. - The Chancellor of the Exchequer. - Getting a lesson from the Shadow Charles who had to balance the books is like getting a lesson from Dracula and had to look after a blood bank. - Eight balls. - A steady as she goes budget. - What kind of ship does he think he's on? The Titanic, they're married, so less. - Welcome to EMQ's from Political Carnation with Ed Balls and George Osborne. (upbeat music) - Welcome to EMQ's Ex-Ministers' Questions. Now, I have just got off the plane from Montreal and I have never been to Montreal before. So it was the first time I absolutely loved it. I mean, I wasn't there for very long, but it's just a very unusual city. I mean, the most obvious thing is, is this sort of big North American city where they all speak French, which is quite unusual if you've not seen it, and really good food as well. And it helped those good weather too. And it's also somewhat, it's interesting, it's kind of stuck a bit in the architecture, stuck a bit in the 1970s. These sort of brutalist buildings and then the old French town. And apparently that was because, you know, the threat of separation meant that sort of investment kind of dried up for a bit. So it got stuck. The threat of Quebec leaving Canada meant that it got stuck a bit in Aspect. But anyway, that's changing and it's pretty dynamic. Have you been to Montreal? - I have, I went when I was at Harvard, at the autumn of 1988. I went in the winter. It was incredibly cold. But the thing about Montreal is the whole city exists underground. So, you know, in Hong Kong, you can basically walk around Hong Kong in sort of walkways above the streets. In Montreal, you can basically park, go shopping, get a restaurants, go out, and move between different parts of the city without ever coming outside. Because it's so cold. That is my kind of big memory of it. I've always enjoyed going to these big Canadian cities. So I'm an Envious Envious Envious Envious Envious Envious. - You would, I tell you what you would have been Envious Envious Envious Envious. I did actually think of you, because I'm always thinking about you, you know. You're in my thoughts all the time. And I went to a restaurant. - Blind me. - Yes, they're called Joe Beef, which I agree doesn't sound very French. But it is a, one of the kind of culinary institutions in Montreal and had a fantastic meal there. And I was thinking, you know, you would have really enjoyed it. Included, you may be or not, maybe you'd thought ethical or for taste reasons you'll object. But it included an amazing foie gras course. You know, they have all of our sandwich, which is their signature dish. - Obviously for the purposes of the podcast, I will say nothing. But just between you and me, I love foie gras. - Wasn't the Starmer government going to ban it at some point? I'm not sure what happened anyway. Anyway, you could be a culinary refugee in Montreal. There was no sign they were going to ban foie gras any time soon. - So the other thing which has been happening, while you've been away, but I thought it was important to kind of mention this to you because you'll have a view on this while you away. John Haley appointed Paul Novak, the General Secretary, the boss of the TUC, to become a director of the Bank of England. That means he joins the court of the Bank of England. And it's caused this big outcry from reform, which had ties to Robert Generick. Actually, can be paid not joined in. Only one party has ever rescued the country from trade union control. We're ready to do so again. If you weren't sure what kind of labor gum we have, or want to know, the news below is a big clue, and it's not good news. That's the news that John Haley has appointed. - Can you say that, Kimmy? - Kimmy said that. - Kimmy paid not. - Now, who did you appoint to the court of the Bank of England? - Well, I did, I had trade union leaders. I mean, the court of the Bank of England is partly a kind of representative body. I refused also to change the name. They always wanted a, it's a bit old-fashioned the idea of the court of the Bank of England. I didn't want to be the chancellor that abolished the court after hundreds years. But they kept wanting to call it the board of the Bank of England. It's not the decision making. You know, it's not the monetary policy that it's achieved. It's not deciding interest rates. But it's, you know, it sets the kind of budget of the bank and it kind of provides oversight and scrutiny of how the bank is run by the governor. I thought it was always important and that you had a representative of the trade union movement on the court. - I think Dave Prattos, who was the leader of Unison. - Margaret Thatcher appointed Gavin Laird to the court of the Bank of England when she was prime minister. He was the electricians kind of engineering union. On the right of the trade union movement, but, you know, important figure in the trade union movement, the labor press people pointed out. I mean, Robert Jenric, Berlin's lost support from credible economists. So he's resorted to dishing out jobs to his mates. That's how he responds to the appointment of Paul Novak from the TUC. Labor press points out that when Robert Jenric was himself a treasury minister, France is a gravy. The general secretary of the TUC was appointed to the court in 2019. So, you know, every now and then, you have these infected non-senses. And in this case, reform and conservative politicians fighting it out to be more anti-trade union. There have been trade unions on the board of the court of the Bank of England for decades under labor and conservative governments. What they all know about. - They're on about trying to score a political point today, Robert, remembering what happened yesterday. It's a different kind of politics, isn't it? I mean, I was all for big tent, trying, you know, win over your opponents, make it harder for labor by, you know, working with the trade union people and so on. And let's, for the honest, these trade union leaders, they love the court of the Bank of England and a good glass of claret and, you know, the great thing about the British trade union movement, I think this is, you compare to some of the continental trade union movements in the 20th century, is it's utterly small-sea conservative. In my experience, doesn't mean they don't do a great job, but they are not anarcho-syndicalists who will not break bread with the governor of the Bank of England. - No, and, you know, KB Vade Knox had a good year. But, you know, whoever thought that it was a good idea, I'm gonna say to put that tweet out in her name, they got that one wrong. - Margaret Vatchy used to give peerages to their trade union leaders. Used to drive off the Scargol mad. You know, she gave Joe Gormley a peerage and it was a big trade union and Scargol had a furious, so. I've been president of the NUM. So, there you go. What are we gonna talk about? Let's take a question, generally. Our first question. This is the hope movement among podcasts to try and bring some hopeful thinking into the British political discourse, right? And we've got a question from Tom Fletcher, who's the UN's humanitarian chief, as part of this initiative. - That is true. To give you a little bit more context, this is the Be Hope podcast takeover, which we're joining for the second year running. And they're allowing podcasts to spotlight leaders, activists and experts around the world, around the theme of hope. And as you said, Tom Fletcher, friend of this podcast, often contributed in different ways. And we both knew him when he was working in the British government, as you said, under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs an emergency relief coordinator. Hyde, Hyde George, this is Tom Fletcher here, the UN humanitarian chief. We're gathering, as you know, world leaders in New York in the coming days. And from AI to climate change to new weapons and new conflicts, it's surely becoming clear to everyone that a driverless world is a pretty perilous place. Now, we're setting out to make big progress on our campaign this year to save 87 million lives. But we're really struggling to cut through. noise right. now. And so my question, how can we find a way to get this message to land with leaders and with the public at large? Thank you. I mean, good question from Tom. And in a way, it picks up from the conversation we had on our main podcast because the conversation about AI and regulation, the conversation about climate change regulation, these are both kind of global imperatives, which at the moment, the US administration is not driving, in fact, not really engaging with at all. But I think the answer is that leaders, as we said on AI, both need to drive this forward, British, Canadian, Australian, French, German, but not by giving up on America. Because in the end, if you haven't got the US, he in much, much harder to drive these agendas forward. And I think you'd have to be persistent. Yes, I mean, is it persistent? So I feel somewhat that the development community, two things, I was a big supporter in government of the development community and proud to be the chancellor that hit the 0.7% target of the national income spent on development aid. And it's very sad that subsequent conservative and labor governments have kind of retreated from that. But I do feel the development, I'll be blunt, I mean, to Tom. I think they're a bit stuck in a kind of world of 10, 15 years ago, where there were these targets, there was kind of the millennium goals, the global community, kind together to agree them and support them. And they were the, as Tom's alluding to, they were the subject of things like next week's UN General Assembly Week. But the world has moved on. And there are like, first of all, it's much more fragmented as he says. And you can't just like ignore that. You have to lean into it. And there are lots of other issues crowding in. And rather than just be persistent, I think you have to sort of re-win the argument of why development assistance and these campaigns, like the one that Tom is promoting, are required in today's world, rather than just saying, well hold on, we all signed up to this 20 years ago, yeah, for sure, but we signed up to a lot of things 20 years ago. And I think what is somewhat lacking, I mean, the, when I was a member of parliament, and I'm not a member of parliament now, so maybe if current MPs who sound wrong about this, please correct me. But when I was a member of parliament, you know, I felt there was a very strong kind of grassroots development movement. In other words, in the towns I represented, there were, there were charity shops, there were kind of successful campaigns to get people to write to their MP to support, you know, development assistance and the points and goals. And you know, there was a kind of grounds well movement, which of course, you know, if you're our age, you know, live aid is a kind of massive example of that in our lifetime. I feel all that somewhat gone. I think the charities have sort of changed their focus. There's been this interesting route. The churches were very involved in time, weren't they? Yeah, I mean, anyone who's, I know it's a bit tangential, but anyone who's been following the route about how Amnesty International has got a bit kind of way laid into issues that were not central to sort of, you know, political prisoners in oppressive regimes. And I think the development charities have sort of, they're no longer absolutely on this issue of how do you, how do you, you know, help the world's very poorest and bring development assistance and pressure on governments. So I think there needs to be a sort of re-energising of the movement, and I think there needs to be a, that kind of re-energising of the grassroots movement, I think intrinsically, British people are generous. And when there are appeals, you know, they take part. But it's all sort of fizzle away. And I think to some degree, there needs to be a sort of re-thinking of like, how do we present this argument in the modern age, rather than wishing we were back at the millennium when, you know, you had real sort of progressive US administration signing up to this thing, and there was only one superpower and the UN, you know, held the stage. You know, it's a different world and they need to adjust to that. Would be my very candid advice as a, as a fan. But it's good that the, the UN is taking part in this podcast takeover and encouraging these kind of conversations. And so, you know, Tom's a kind of guy who'll always be kind of thinking and challenging and asking how can we do things better. You have to look to both those people who want to sign up to a social justice mission and those people who, who know that they're selfish just in the world, but that we need to solve big challenges which impact upon us very negatively through cooperation, whether that is climate change or global migration. So hope is the key here. I still believe in a town called hope. Do you remember that? Yeah, I do. Right, our next question is the good segue to the United States. This is a question from Helen. Hello, I'm George. My name's Helen Hassel and I'm from the Dollywood Foundation, home of Dolly Parton's Imagination Library. Obviously, I love the podcast. I was delighted to hear Ed's story about meeting Dolly Parton again. However, I was horrified to hear this time, the civil servants advice that the books just pile up and aren't read. We mail around 88,000 books a month direct to children across the UK. We're about to mail out 8 million and I can tell you that all the research indicates that the books are read again and again. Families tell us they love the monthly book if it's an urge to read and children soon learn to recognise the package that comes through the door is their book and they want it read immediately. The programme has a huge impact on children's lives from supporting bonding with tiny babies through to increase school readiness and embedding a culture of reading for pleasure within the family. We've got lots more research that I'd love to tell you about if you're interested. Thank you. I have to say, when I saw this question came in, I was briefly nervous because I thought, you know, we were going to be dressed down because of Robert Preston's rendition of Jolene that somehow the Dollywood Foundation would think Century's Dad had taken a step too far, but no, we had. I don't think Dollywood feels hugely under threat yet from Century's Dad. I mean, maybe I'm not sure single-handedly you're going to destroy the reputation of Jolene as a song. I think that is true, but I think I'm also going to go a stage further than that and say that I actually think is clear. I mean, I don't think this is always clear what I'm about to say. So, within our band set, I actually think that our rendition of Pink Pony Club is actually better than Chapel Roans, which is controversial, but I think Jolene, I think Dolly Parton did it better than Robert Preston and Century's Dad. That is my view, but that is not what we were being dressed down for, and I don't think it was actually something dressed down at all. No, she was pointing out that the books are red, that the amazing program works, and they're not, they're not, you know, when you told the story of Meeting Dolly Parton and the, I seem to remember the British Civil War. Do you want me to tell that again? The British Civil War, you don't have to tell. The British Civil Service were a little bit skeptical weren't they, that A, you'd have to end up giving the money and B, sending people books wasn't a very good idea, essentially, or a lot of the books wouldn't be red, but it's good to hear that A, you ignored the Civil Service and be that Helen points out they got this on wrong. Well, unfortunately, I mean, I ignored the Civil Service in their advice not to have the meeting with Dolly Parton. And then they wanted to be part of the meeting, didn't they? They all wanted to be part of the meeting, but what I didn't ignore the Civil Service on, you know, we didn't provide British government financial support to the Dollywood Foundation, and you know, as I said at the time, the advice at the time was they were worried that unless you gave the book into somebody's hand, they were less likely to read it. That was the research. And also that if you, because people are often itinerant, if you just keep sending the books, they can often be sent to an address where they get the family no longer live. But the conclusion I draw from Helen's excellent question, but also the documented empirical evidence on the success of their program and how much of an impact it's had on children's reading is that you, and this is an important lesson for all the ministers who listened to our podcast, you should always challenge the advice of your civil servants. Yeah, if Dolly Parton says she wants a meeting, don't say no. That is a completely right. And the great thing is that the work of the Dollywood Foundation is going to continue, including support for children's reading around the world. And brilliant to know that I'm not sure she said this in her question, but I happen to know it's true that Helen and her family are big listeners to our podcast, so good to see the legacy lives on. Thanks Helen for your question. We'll be back shortly after this break. Therapy's biggest impact doesn't show up in some dramatic breakthrough. It shows up in the smallest moments. You bite your tongue instead of escalating. You put your phone down instead of firing off that text. You say what you actually mean instead of what would hurt someone else the most. Nobody applauds those moments, but they quietly change your life. That's what growing feels like, and that's exactly what growth therapy is here for. Grow is therapy that works, covered by insurance. Sessions average $21 with insurance and some pay as little as $0 depending on their plan. There are no subscriptions, no long-term commitments. You just pay per session. Grow Connect you with thousands of people. high quality licensed therapists across the US, offering both virtual and in-person sessions, nights and weekends. You can search by what matters, like insurance, specialty, identity, or availability, and you can book a therapy session in minutes and begin in as little as two days, not the national 48-day average. See if you could pay as little as $0 for therapy in seconds at growtherapy.com/acast. That's growtherapy.com/acast. Growtherapy.com/acast. Availability and coverage vary by state and insurance plan. Hey, it's Adam Grant from Ted's podcast, rethinking with Adam Grant. Group health insurance costs keep climbing and the plans rarely fit everyone's needs. There's a newer model worth knowing about called an ICRA, which lets employers set a contribution and employees choose their own health plan based on their doctors, budget, and what actually works for them. This message comes from Jackson. Taxes aren't something you can only think about once a year. With investments, planning for tax days year round. Fortunately, Jackson offers tax-efficient products. Visit Jackson.com for more information on how our products can make your tax bill a little bit less painful. Jackson is short for Jackson Financial Incorporated, Jackson National Life Insurance Company Lansing, Michigan, and Jackson National Life Insurance Company of New York. Purchase New York. Welcome back. Here's an important question and a good question from Hannah in response to our discussion last week on the British government's moves on sanctioning the illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine. Hi Ed and George. I absolutely love the podcast. I was listening to the recent episode from Northern Israel while I was preparing my bombshell to for the Russia-China holiday, which thankfully passed with no trauma. I know both of you are strong supporters of the British Jewish community, and yet despite it all, I still thought there was a subtle but uncomfortable undertone that British Jews need to be good Jews and piped down, which was uncomfortable for many reasons, especially after what happened to Manchester this time last year. That obviously needs to be a balance between legitimate criticism of Israel, which many British Jews will do in private, if not in public, and supporting the Jewish community. How can the British Jewish community be best supported in these challenging times? Oh look, it's really good to have this question from Hannah, and let's come to the substance of a question in a second. But before we do, just listening to her question and thinking about the reality of her lives and the safety of her family, I don't know whether you have watched this. I actually mentioned this on our kitchen cabinet briefing earlier in the week. There is a Israeli television program called Fowder, which is into Fowder means chaos. It's in Hebrew with them, you know, by watching subtitles. And the first four series are brilliant, and the fifth series has just come out. The first four series, it's about operation of an Israeli Secret Service unit into the occupied territories, but the praise it's had over the years has always been about the very kind of balanced, careful way the television program is made. Not to say that there isn't an Israeli perspective or bias. Of course, every television has a bias, but very well-reviewed thoughtful program. The fifth series is all about the team in the months after the October 7th attack. And within the series, and I've just watched it, I hadn't watched it when I did the thing for our kitchen cabinet briefing. Halfway through the series, they have two episodes, which they say is optional, not to watch, because for the flow of the narrative, you don't need to watch them, but it has two episodes where it takes you back in a sort of almost drama documentary way to the events of October 7th. And it is utterly horrifying and upsetting and very, very difficult to watch. And the fearful reality that Hannah and many people like her, including people listening to our podcast, will experience is worth watching. And we totally understand the huge pressure and challenge your face, Hannah. I'm going to say this because it was George who was critical of the chief rabbi. I don't think that you were saying he should pipe down, or the British community should pipe down. I think the thing which we were pointing out is that for anti-Semitism, which can sometimes occur in our country, is the idea that if you are Jewish, that means you aren't necessarily, whether you're in Britain or in America or in Canada or wherever, that you are necessarily a defender of and therefore should be criticised or attacked for the actions of the Israeli Prime Minister and the Israeli government in Israel. And I think you were saying, weren't you? That the way the chief rabbi stepped into that political debate about British government sanctions against Israel was in danger of legitimising those kinds of attacks on British Jews and that was a risky thing for him to do. Yeah, I think the way I put it, well, first of all, you know, on the issue of illegal settlements, they are illegal. I mean, they are, they've been deemed illegal by the United Nations. We remember the United Nations. The UK has signed up to that and we remember the permanent security council and Conservative governments, as well as Labour governments, have, you know, used the evidence of David Cameron as foreign secretary, you know, he sanctioned individual illegal settlers and so it's a mistake to think this is all like some brand new thing. You know, there's been a consistent British government policy on illegal Israeli settlements. And then second, I mean, I would say my argument is actually pipe up, not pipe down. And I'm absolutely if that's the impression I gave that, you know, somehow, you know, the Jewish people need to just be kind of quiet and they make a noise and that's the opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying that, and it's in your question, that you hear privately from Jewish people, they're very critical of the Netanyahu government and they're very worried. Thoughts are my friends, I'm very worried that things that Netanyahu government are doing are not increasing the security of Israel, the undermining the security of Israel. And yet, when it comes to saying anything in public, I think people are nervous of doing so. They feel that like there's enough criticism out there of Israel or indeed there's genuine anti-Semitism out there that the last thing they need to do is sort of add to the criticism by expressing any concerns about the Netanyahu government. So that's where they actually pipe down to use the language you've used in the question, Anna. And so I would say I think we want to hear more. If there are things the Israeli government does wrong, let's hear not just criticism from the kind of perennial opponents of Israel or people who don't want Israel to exist or the anti-Semites, it's good to hear that debate inside the Jewish community, which happens, as you say. I think I said in the podcast, we can't have like, you know, I support Israel right or wrong. You can support the Israel's right to exist, absolutely, and challenge anyone who challenges that. But that doesn't mean you uncritically agree that anything the current government of Israel, whoever that government is, does has to be supported or if you have any doubts about it, you should only express those doubts in private, be my kind of argument. You know, but it's good to hear from you and certainly if I gave the other impression, that's not what I wanted to do. And thank you, Hannah, for your question in sharing the reality of Russia Shana with us. Next question from another friend of this podcast. Hi, Ed and George, this is Nick Batter. I'm a gold subscriber and a very happy listener to the podcast. The government has postponed the approval of new oil and gas fields in the North Sea, and it continues to block new exploration, despite the renewed risk that supplies will be short because of the conflict in the Middle East. It's political fear of the Greens now driving policy at the risk of making Britain more dependent on imports. Do you think the postponement will be effective? Are there any examples you can remember of occasions when political calculations of overridden rational economic choices? You know Nick Batter very well, and he worked and supported, helped the Gordon Brown government, didn't he? He came into number 10, but before that, he worked at BP. So you might say, okay, well, he's got a vested interest in oil exploration, but I actually think the point he's making here is a very strong one. I mean, I think this is a kind of good example of what we're talking about in the main podcast. So Andy Bernan comes in, his first job, as I think he would say, is to establish himself as a new Prime Minister and try and make Labour a bit more popular and squeeze the Greens, which is a way of making Labour a bit more popular and reducing the political pressure, at least on the left of Labour. So he has been doing that, but as a result, he has been postponing a decision, which the Starmer government also has postponed, about drilling in the North Sea. And this is a hangover from you know, an age when oil security and oil prices were not nearly such a big issue. It was quite a controversial time, but Labour, you know, in opposition said they would not allow any more drilling and no sea. But the world's moved on, events moved on, and there's a political price Labour are paying for that position as well, because the Conservatives rather unexpectedly want a bi-lection in Aberdeen on this issue. And everyone was expecting Burnham to come in and just make the announcement that the drilling could go ahead at least in one of these fields. But they've postponed it and postponed it, and now there's a sense they're postponing it because of the bi-lection in Hoban, the Kierst-Arms seat, which he vacated, and Polanski is the green candidate. But I don't think, you know, that's not very good politics in my view. I mean, because if you're interested in this issue, you know that they're just stalling and postponing and they're probably going to say yes. Meanwhile, the kind of country could do with some energy security, and it's not like they're always going to come gushing tomorrow. These are long-term developments, and it would instill some confidence that the government's got a kind of medium-term economic plan. So I'd rather agree with Nick. I don't think they're winning any votes by delaying on this, personally. Completely. Look, it's entirely consistent with a long-term net zero policy, and it's entirely consistent with wanting to increase our use of renewables. The fact is that we are going to be using fossil fuels for some time to come, and we're going to be importing them, unless we have continuing supply from the North Sea, and given Andy Burnham has made absolutely clear, he's going to do this. The appearance of not doing it for political reasons, I kind of think it's also agree with its undermining. Get on with it. Thanks for your question, Nick. We'll be back after this break with one more question. Sessions average $21 with insurance, and some pay as little as $0 depending on their plan. There are no subscriptions, no long-term commitments, you just pay per session. Grow connects you with thousands of high-quality licensed therapists across the US, offering both virtual and in-person sessions, nights and weekends. You can search by what matters, like insurance, specialty, identity, or availability, and you can book a therapy session in minutes, and begin in as little as two days, not the national 48-day average. Season three of the Talent Transformation podcast is here. Join Avature's CEO, Dimitri Boylin, as he talks with HR leaders who are leveraging disruption to stay ahead. Here from the brilliant minds behind the Talent Strategies at IBM, Siemens Energy, Transcom, and many more. Subscribe now so you never miss an episode. The Talent Transformation podcast, redefining talent, one conversation at a time. Hey everyone, it's Chris Gellibout here, host of the Side Hustle School podcast. This episode is powered by AT&T Business. In my early days, I did some of my best work in parked cars or coffee shops. But when I landed my first big contract, I realized I couldn't bet my future on a public connection that cuts out if someone turns on a blender. As a small business owner, you're already wearing at least 10 hats. You shouldn't have to be your own IT department as well. That's why I rely on AT&T Business. They keep your connectivity reliable, so you have one less thing to worry about. Powered by AT&T Business, built to work. Get AT&T Business at business.attt.com. So welcome back. This is a very good question from James. Hi, Ed and George. I recently interviewed my local street party where I was lucky enough to see Centros Dad perform for the second year running. I thought Ed and his bandmates were great, and I particularly enjoyed your rendition of London Calling. It got me thinking about music and politics. You probably saw that Andy Burnham was recently filmed playing guitar to a Smith song on a recent trip to see troops in Keith. He got quite a mixed reaction online. So, do you think that music can actually work as a genuine tool for political communication? Or are politicians just always going to look a bit uncool trying it? And is it best left to the actual musicians? Ted Heath famously had a piano moved into Downing Street, but I'm not aware that he ever played it publicly or as part of a campaign effort. I was going to think what is the the best example I could think of of music shifting politics? And obviously things can only get better. The Labour 1997 anthem is remembered as the young, blonde, brown, coming into government. That was that anthem. But I'm not sure it changed politics. It was more of a reflection of what was going on. This is my best example. No one remembers that I got de-reamed to say they were voting touring in 2010, which I thought was one of my great, I could believe the coup and then no one was interested. What happened? Well, I said let's get the people who did the things can only get better song in '07 to say they're going to support us in 2010. And if we managed to pull off or release some members of the band, as far as I remember, and then like that one was interested in the story. I thought it was such a great story, but I was wrong. So that is also an example of music not changing the course of politics, because you know, if it had an impact, you know, one of the majority. But do you remember this? 1992. Bill Clinton, young, rock star politician, knew on the block up against, you know, the aging George Bush senior up against Ross Perot, goes on the Arsenio Hall show to play the saxophone. But he went on the Arsenio Hall show and it was like, oh my goodness, you know, he's young and cool. He really is a rock star. And actually, it was one of those moments where music was used to tell a wider political story and it certainly worked to Bill Clinton's advantage. I think it probably helped as well, didn't it, that people knew that Tony Blair played in a band at university, ugly rumors, you know, that he was. Because the interesting about John Major, he wasn't actually that much older than Tony Blair, but he felt like he was from the sort of fifties generation, and Tony Blair was from the sixties generation. And that was true of Bill Clinton too. This was the first sort of sixties generation child who was, they were assuming kind of leadership roles. There was also a moment, I think you may be too young for this, but do you remember in the 1970s, there was a massive Saturday Night Show called the Mike Yahweh Show, Mike Yahweh Did Impressions, and at the height of, you know, the Labour Government's economic challenges, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Dennis Healy, went on the Mike Yahweh show on a Saturday night and played the piano, and he did it really well, but with humour, and it sort of, you know, it had a big impact on his standing as a politician that he was relaxed and dealing with the situation. Do you remember in Margaret Margaret, Margaret Thatcher chose his favourite song, "Two Little Boys" by the now utterly disgraced Roll Harris, my favourite song of all time, two little boys with two little toys. I'd sponge that for my memory. I've got a serious history example, actually, of where I think music matters. So you have to go back into the French Revolution. You know, the French Revolution is happening in Paris, but it's also breaking out elsewhere across France in different cities, but it's not particularly unifying, and there's not a kind of sense of nationhood to the revolution. And then there's a group of workers, I think, I should have looked this up before I say this, but anyway, because I might get this wrong, but from memory, anyway, there's a group of workers who start marching from Marseille up to Paris, and the kind of march gets bigger and bigger and bigger as it comes towards Paris, more and more people join it. And they pick up a song, which they didn't invent, but I think it had been a kind of military, like the French Revolutionary Forces, someone had already come up with this song, and that they start singing the song on the march, and it's now the French National Anthem, the Marseilles, that's what it's called the Marseilles, because it's from the March from Marseille. And I think the Anthem does create a kind of, it unifies the revolution across Paris, of course, France, it brings a kind of national identity to the revolution and the fact that that the national anthem is a song not from Paris but from the Marseilles marches. So that's my best stab at a kind of piece of music that did change or help change history. Have you got any Ted Heath music stories? Well, I think you're being a bit unfair to Ted Heath. Well, two things. Well, I mean, while we've been recording this as anyone distanced by podcasts, we actually had a piano delivered at this house. It's the famous picture here is the piano leaving the house not not arriving. So it's Ted Heath's piano being taken out of 10 down in the street. I think is the real sort of symbol in a sort of classic British. It's right in front of the cameras when he'd been kicked out. And I think to be fair to said, he really was a serious musician and he he actually was a conductor, wasn't he? He conducted an orchestra while he was prime minister. And I think he took his music very, very seriously. And so he it wasn't, you know, a bit like centrist ads. He was like a proper musician. I do agree with them. Our questioner that the best song you do is probably London calling since it sort of shouted not so in any way as a song effectively pulled off. I'm not going to be true. Look at the moment our best song is Madonna like a prayer. And but that's also it's it's sung in a particular way. I've got a great Ted Heath story. The the best, in my view, call composed of the 20th century Herbert Howles wrote a huge amount of English literature for English cathedrals. Also used to judge competitions. And in the 1930s he was judging an organ competition and awarded the first prize to this young musician called Ted Heath. And Ted Heath, or Edward Heath, then asked Howles to give him a reference when he was applying to be the organ scholar at Baelic College Oxford. And Howles said he would only on the condition that when Ed Heath became prime minister, Howles would be invited to Downing Street and could write a piece of music for Ted Heath. And then Ted Heath becomes prime minister and invited Howles to Downing Street to a special dinner they were having. I think the guest of honor was her majesty, the queen mother. And Howles writes a piece of music which I've actually conducted with the BBC singers. And the words to it were written by Ted Heath's principal private secretary. And it's called Prayer for Ten Downing Street. And so Howles wrote Prayer for Ten Downing Street for Edward Heath. And it was performed for the first time in Downing Street at this dinner. And isn't that a great story? That is a really good story. I didn't know that one. And I'm okay here. I'm going to argue that that does change the course of British history because Ted Heath is from a very very ordinary poor background. He's one of the humblest origin prime ministers we've ever had. I think his mother was a chamber maid in broad stares in Kent, getting to Oxford, getting back then, getting the scholarship to Baleale. That is what would have propelled him into a position where he could then become a conservative MP and then become prime minister. Without that endorsement from Howles, maybe he would never become, never gone to university, never have become prime minister. And then Britain would never have joined the EU. And that was the end of the story. Oh no, sorry, we left, didn't we? But for release for 30 or 40 years we were in. There we are, James. You were right to say music can change the course of history. And that included with Ted Heath. Thanks for your question. That's it for this episode of EMQs. Don't forget, you can always email us questions at politicalcounsey.co.uk or message us on our socials. Yeah, and we're also pleased and excited to announce you may have been watching our main podcast on YouTube. It's become really, really successful and popular there. We are now going to be posting a video version of EMQs at the moment. We've only been doing an audio version, but we will have a YouTube version of EMQs coming out shortly. And that is not all for those of you listening Apple podcasts. There's also going to be a visualized episode of the show there as well as on YouTube. So you can look at our pretty faces as well as listening to our dulcet times. And you're playing the piano. We'll be back on Thursday with our main show in full video and we will see you there. Thanks for listening to politicalcounsey. This has been a plus of fun to go production. This episode is sponsored by Ambetter Health. Group health insurance costs keep climbing, and the plans rarely fit everyone's needs. Find out if an ICRA is right for you at Ambetter Health dot com. 98 of the top 100 US accounting firms trust Bill to simplify and secure bill pay. That's proven financial infrastructure built on over a trillion dollars of secure payments. Visit bill dot com slash proven for a special offer. Bank and credit union decision makers. Here are the expert conversations that actually move the needle. Believe in banking is the award winning podcast bringing you bold ideas and real insights from your peers. The leaders shaping what's next in banking and credit unions. Whether you're navigating digital transformation, branch strategy, or building a stronger brand, we cover the conversations that matter most. Lead your organization forward. Search believe in banking and listen now.