it's james in the studio in westminster. and it's chris in westminster too. so, the reason you were speaking to the labour leader, sir keir starmer, chris, was because he has made a big u—turn today. yes. so this is on what he calls his green prosperity plan. this is the idea of throwing quite a lot of public money into kind of turbo—charging what he thinks are the kind of industries of the future that might have a kind of green tinge to them. but they're also about, he hopes, providing the well—paid jobs of the future, the industries of the future. two and a half years ago, he said labour would spend in government £28 billion a year on that. that was diluted in the summer of last year to £28 billion a year by the second half of a first labour term. so that would be sort of mid—2027, if they were to win the election and only if they thought it was affordable relative to their economic rules. last few weeks, quite frankly, they've been in a complete mess about it and not really been able to give a straight answer to a straight question about whether 28 was about to bite the dust, and today it bit the dust. so you were pressing sir keir on this, chris, because it's tricky for them and it gets to lots of issues of economic credibility, trust, consistency. there's all sorts of angles that are problematic for the labour party here, aren't there? there are. so, i think in the end, what they concluded was that they'd hitched themselves to a number that they were getting a huge amount of political heat for because the conservatives and others were saying, "this is massive and you're "going to have to either crank up taxes or do a lot of borrowing." but the twist was they'd already kind of acknowledged they were not likely to get to the number anyway, so they were having to defend a number they were never likely to get, what they might argue, would be the benefits of it whilst still taking the heat for it. but, injunking it, how do youjunk that while still trying to claim that lots of stuff you've announced will happen? that is what keir starmer is doing. but that's quite a hard argument to make and convince people of, i suspect. and then there's the whole thing about what keir starmer stands for and whether he changes his mind rather a lot. and that's been a political attack line from the conservatives for some time. and the basis upon which they can make that argument does include quite a few case studies, a lot of the policies that keir starmer stood for when he was running for the labour leadership, things like getting rid of university tuition fees in england, reforming and rebranding universal credit, the benefits package and various other things. that was then. this is since he's been leader. there's been a whole question around where labour now are on bankers�* bonuses. and so an argument around u—turns is one that his opponents are really going for. and this is another case study of that, whether or not you think it was a wise move or not. so, you've been speaking to the leader of the uk labour party today, but we've both been speaking to the leader of the scottish labour party, anas sarwar. hello. how are you, james? very well. how are you? it never stops in scottish politics. we're keeping busy. nice to see you and hear you on our newscast. my pleasure to be on. let's cut to the quick — big story of the day, keir starmerjunking this promise of £28 billion on green projects. is that a good idea? look, i think the important thing to stress here is that the outcomes, the plan and the mission remains, and that is to go for clean energy by 2030. that has got massively significant interventions for what it means in scotland. for example, gb energy, that will be headquartered in scotland, something that will help create 50,000 jobs, bring down people's bills and help invest in delivering energy security here. huge investment in our port infrastructure in scotland, which is much needed if we are to meet the transition, and also looking to strengthen our supply chains here in scotland, so we can not offshore the jobs in the supply chain but actually keep the jobs here. now, the reality is we are having to make these difficult choices around the finances because of the economic carnage that has been set upon this country by the conservatives. when rachel reeves made that pledge at the start, you know, compared to now, the interest rates on international borrowing have gone up by four times. and i think it's perfectly right for us to focus on the outcomes rather than the inputs, but also to make sure that we are not risking the public finances, that we're being cognisant of the fiscal rules, but not shirking from the ambition and the green prosperity plan that is going to be crucial to delivering economic growth and opportunities in the uk and in particular for scotland. i notice that, mr sarwar, you didn't use a yes or a no. so, just in the interests of abundant clarity, is it a good idea that this 28 billion figure is being dropped? it's a good idea to be consistent with our fiscal rules and not risk the public finances. so that's a yes? and it's also a good idea to maintain ourambition and our plan to deliver the green prosperity plan. so he's made the right call, keir starmer? let's just be absolutely clear. i just don't want anyone to come to the wrong impression of what you're saying. he's made the right call, yeah? i think it's the fiscally responsible thing to do, to say we will not hold hard to an arbitrary figure, given the economic carnage that's been imposed on this country by the conservatives. but i think they're also right to say we cannot shirk from our responsibility not just to avert the climate emergency, but actually the economic opportunities of the green transition, which will disproportionately benefit scotland. so there is no movement, no stepping back from the green prosperity plan, the investment in that transition, gb energy being headquartered here in scotland and the investment, as i say, in that port infrastructure and in the supply chains, which is good for scotland, good for the uk and actually good for the planet. so, you say you need to focus on outcomes, not inputs, but one requires the other. and how can you stick to the precise plan and the precise number ofjobs that you say that plan will create if you're investing less? the reason why i think that is because it's more thanjust one part. so, of course, the figure formed one part of the commitment, but actually the policies within the green prosperity plan is what actually delivers the outcome. and i'm actually struck by, whenever you're out speaking to people that are on the front line here, people in our oil and gas sector who want to make that transition, people who are working in renewables, who want the government to be on their side and deliver stability in that transition, none of them are arguing, actually, that we don't have enough financial resource because they believe we can leverage in the private sector money. what they want is a government that's going to give stability to our economy, that's going to act as a partner and collaborate with them in terms of those strategic objectives and is going to help break down the barriers. for example, reforming our grid, which is crucial, reforming our planning system, which is, of course, devolved. but we're going to be setting out proposals around that in the coming week here in scotland. but also, how we are strengthening the infrastructure that then makes the green transition a reality. and that is going to take time and that's going to take commitment right now. sure. and so i think how we can leverage in that private sector money to make those investments is a really, really crucial part of the plan. yeah, but newscasters are clever people and the voters are not daft. and they know full well that if you say your plan required 28 billion last summer, when you and i sat in the same room as sir keir starmer in leith, where he said he was doubling down on that commitment, you can't say then this plan for this number ofjobs requires this much money, and then tell the voters the next year that it doesn't. i'm so sorry, but how does that make any sense? well, two things, james. one is if you actually look at the details of the green prosperity plan, the figure in terms of actual spending commitments within the plan is nowhere near the 28 billion figure that has been suggested as the longer term ambition, in terms of investment. i mean, notjust suggesting, it was party policy, wasn't it? i completely understand that. but the second point is you're right to say that the electorate is not stupid. the electorate completely understands that the financial frame in which rachel reeves was making that announcement a number of years ago is completely different from the financial situation we find ourselves in now, and god knows the financial situation we find ourselves in come the next general election, because we have had the liz truss mini—budget. we've got the cost of living crisis, the cost of running a business crisis as well, and the economic carnage that is being imposed on this country. and the risk, actually, and this is an even bigger and deeper risk, the risk for any political party, one that aspires to be in government is... the risk is you don't learn a lesson from liz truss. and that's why i think it's completely responsible for us to say we are not going to set an arbitrary figure that risks economic carnage and further risks people's mortgages across the country. you just described the 28 billion figure as arbitrary, which has been party policy for the last two and a half years until today. was it a mistake to put that number out there in the first place then? well, i've always been of the view that we should focus on the outcome rather than the input. so i think... so it was a mistake? well, look, economic situations have overtaken us, events have overtaken us, and we don't yet know what the economic situation will be. but, as i say, i have always been of the view that we should focus on the outcome, not the input. and there are many, many levers that both the uk government can pull to attract the investment we need to see in order to deliver that transition. but also many levers we have to pull here in scotland, and getting that coordinated approach i think is going to be really important over the coming years. let's just talk about that impact on scotland, then, because it's obviously the part of the world about which you care most. you said just a few minutes ago in this interview that this plan would still help to create 50,000 jobs in scotland. injune, when we were at that event in leith, labour said the investment would create 29,000 jobs in the uk by 2050 and could support up to 50,000 jobs in scotland by 2030. sorry to just throw all these numbers out there, but i think it really matters. how manyjobs have you modelled will actually be created by your plan and how is that affected by spending less? so i think, if you look at where the modelling comes in, so again, you're looking at one part of the wider plan. quite an important one. no, of course, i'm not shying away from that. but if you look at the key strategic parts that are relevant to scotland, gb energy, that will be headquartered in scotland, will create jobs. how many? a paper has been worked on the specifics— a paper has been worked on the specifics of gb energy. and we're doing that in partnership with the industry actually, because it's really important that whatever pound we put into gb energy is able to leverage at least £3 back from the private sector. that's how we maximise the investment. hang on. i'm so sorry. just let me just quickly... that's the point. you've said 50,000 jobs for scotland. now you've said you haven't modelled how manyjobs are going to be created at gb energy. so how do you get to that 50,000 number? you didn't let me finish. the point i was making is when you talk about these supply chainjobs, we are talking about, of course, the institution itself, gb energy. but actually that's not where the bulk of the jobs come from. is that keir starmer? it's actually one of your producers on the phone. so i'm not sure if this sound's good enough, but it's one of your producers on the phone. we can hear you. sorry. no problem. the problem but the but the the jobs come from actually the supply chain. but the the jobs come from actually the supply chain. so building up the infrastructure, strengthening the supply chains, for example, cabling plants and cabling facilities that don't currently exist in a meaningful way in scotland. how we ramp that up and i know there are conversations and discussions happening around that, it's about the wider supply chain. newscasters will be fascinated, anas, about — where as the scottish labour leader you seek to point out differences of instinct with keir starmer and where you don't and we'll come onto some of those differences that you've talked about in the past in a moment. but i'm intrigued in terms of your argument on the 28 billion, which you've set out very clearly, particularly given you can make an argument that scotland has an outsized role in terms of energy in the uk and therefore, any sense of dilution around this policy could have a disproportionate impact on the very people you're seeking to speak for and represent. i actually think it's the opposite. i think this plan and this policy... put less in and get more out? no, no, i think this plan and this policy has a disproportionate benefit and opportunity for scotland compared to other parts of the uk, and that's why i'm such a strong champion for it. i'm not disputing that but what i'm suggesting is if it is an outsized impact for all the reasons people will be familiar with, if everything else being equal, there is now less going to it, or the prospect of less going to it than could have been the case because of changing circumstances, that scotland's benefit would be considerably smaller? chris, let me challenge that back. if we were sitting here and i was telling you that we were going to make a promise that we aren't able to keep, that would be worse and it would undermine the opportunities... but isn't that exactly what labour are saying today? that's exactly what you're saying today, 28 billion has gone in the skip. no, no, farfrom it. what labour is saying is we are looking at working on the fact of the economic carnage that has been beset on our country by the conservatives. we are not going to make those same mistakes. fiscal responsibility... it's not somebody else�*s fault, though, that you decided to pin your flag to an arbitrary number, as you described it. that was a decision that labour made. i've always said we should focus on the outcomes rather than the inputs. sure, i acknowledge that. that's questions perhaps you could take up elsewhere. the point i'm making was... questions it sounds like you need to take up elsewhere! no, no, look, as you can imagine, i have lots of conversations with my colleagues, both in scotland and right across the uk. but i'm absolutely determined and actually, it's unshakeable, keir's commitment to the green prosperity plan and the disproportionate benefit it has here in scotland. that's why it will be a frontal part of our election campaign, notjust here in scotland but right across the uk. this is a good news story for scotland, this green prosperity plan, and the outcomes of this green prosperity plan are ones we're going to champion with ferocity between now and the next general election. sound the klaxon, sound the election klaxon! you've mentioned the election word. sound the klaxon, sound the election klaxon! let me ask you a policy—related question, then. go for it. sir keir starmer says uk labour will not reinstate a cap on bankers�* bonuses. is that the right decision? look, as i made clear at the time when i was speaking to one of your colleagues last week when i was in london, is i stand by what i said when the cap on bankers' bonuses was lifted by the conservatives, that it was yet another example of an economically illiterate, morally bankrupt tory party that has their own priorities. so therefore, i'm sorry, it's very easy to follow that logic to say, therefore, if you want to keep it... no, because we're not in government. not reinstate it... yes, but you are saying that you will not reinstate it and therefore why is it not evidence of an economically illiterate and morally bankrupt labour party? so the balance of what we have to look at, and actually, i think the details of the broader announcement around financial services has been missed from the conversation we're having today. if you actually look at the details of what was in the financial services review that rachel reeves published last week, it was closer ties with the european union, something that is benefiting all of us in the uk and many people in scotland want us to have closer ties with the european union. it was about pushing more jobs out of the financial services hub in london, out into other parts of the uk. we have a financial services hub here in edinburgh, which means more jobs, better paid jobs here in edinburgh. and it was also about making sure we worked in partnership with the financial services industry in order to inspire confidence to get more investments into, for example, technology and the green revolution that we've just been talking about because so many of the investments have to come from those financial services industries, as well as those pensions pots, both in terms of public and private sector pension pots. what about the two—child benefit cap? is that — continuing with that, is that the correct decision? sir keir starmer thinks it is. so, we were right to vote against the two—child benefit cap. we were right to campaign against the two—child benefit cap. and i believe we should move as fast as we can to remove the two—child benefit cap. but again, we have to be cognisant of the fiscal rules and the economic situation that that puts us in if we do become the uk labour government come the next general election. anas, as you know, it's thejob ofjames and i and others in journalism to ask sort of difficult questions of political leaders. never! when are you going to start asking them? very good! very good. but there's a broader thing here, which i'm always conscious of, which is that a responsible and mature journalism should acknowledge that political leadership is difficult. and holding senior roles in a political party that aspires to govern or does govern is difficult. and i guess the essence of what james has just been asking for the last few minutes, is this — the reality of your political life when in scotland for labour to succeed, it needs to win seats at a westminster election from the snp and indeed at a scottish parliament election. from keir starmer�*s perspective, of course he's aware of that, but he's also conscious of winning a lot of seats that have previously voted conservative. and that speaks to the kind of psephological reality of some of those differences of emphasis, and sometimes outright differences, between you and keir starmer and others where there are, where there is overlap. and ijust wonder how you, you know, how you wrestle with that kind of psephological reality and how you make that work in a way that is logical, sellable, loyal, up to a point, but showing differences where you think there are differences. that's the reality of politics. and it's a long—winded question, but ijust wonder how you wrestle with that. no, it's a really good question, and i actually think if you look at how we are doing, we are making it work, because i think the reality is... look, we're in a symbiotic relationship in the sense that, you know, for scottish labour to do better, we need uk labour to do better and look like it can beat the conservatives and for uk labour to beat the conservatives, they need scottish labour to do better in scotland. and i think if you look at what's happened over the last almost three years i've been leader, you can see that's exactly what the case has been. the rutherglen hamilton west by—election being the perfect example of that. we've gone in that short period of time to being 32 points behind the snp to now many polls being ahead of the snp. but feet on the ground, we've won one by—election, we've still got lots more work to do and we're completely cognisant of that. i think the other challenge is... you like that word, don't you, cognisant? what is that word, cognisant? it's probably my... it's probably my word of the day, sorry. maybe just words i wake up with i use a lot on any given day. i like it. i'll try and use a different one, then. no, no, don't, i'm all for cogni... i don't know, i don't think, i can't say it and i certainly wouldn't be able to spell it! but i'm quite happy to have my vocabulary expanded. james is aware of the word. listen, i hope you guys can give me other_ words in the day as well, and i'll use them on other podcasts and other shows when i'm on. i'll give you one word... i'll give you one word. can i answer the point? no, finish your point, quickly, yeah, go for it. sorry, go on. because i think it's a really important question, actually, which is, look, i can totally understand why, particularly in england, labour has to do a strategy of reassurance and change and also in my view, hope. and also, in my view, hope. actually, we need to do less reassurance in scotland because scotland's already made its mind up. it wants to get rid of this rotten tory government, well before people in the rest of the uk have woken up to that same reality. and hopefully we'll work together now to get rid of the tories, right across the uk, and so right here in scotland, we have got to put hope front and centre, as well as change, and i think we also have to make a values argument. i would argue we have to make a values argument across the uk, but we in particular have to make a values argument here in scotland because you'll have the false projection of the snp that somehow people in other parts of the uk don't share the same values as working people here in scotland. i would actually dispute that. i've spent a lot of time in the red wall of england, in the red wall of england, particularly during the last local government election campaigns, and, 0k, they may well have taken a very different view to the central belt of scotland on brexit. different view to the central belt but actually, many of the demographics, many of the challenges, many of the frustrations, many of the issues they care about are absolutely the same — whether you're in the red wall of england or the central belt of scotland. whether you're in the red wall of england or the central belt of scotland. and i think far too often we try and pretend the people are ultimately different or they're driven by different issues. actually, i think they're probably driven by many of the same issues. and that's why addressing those real impacts, i think have to be front and centre of the election campaign and why i think we are actually getting the balance right between the message we have in the rest of the uk and the message we have here in scotland. but let me just, one final point on this subject. go for it. give me a new word, though. give me a new word in this question. the word is "authentic", because the criticism is that scottish labour, with its policy platforms on bankers�* bonuses, on welfare, on not quoting margaret thatcher in speeches or writing about her in articles for the sunday telegraph and so on, is authentic labour and that sir keir starmer�*s labour isn't. well, look, i believe keir starmer is authentic. i believe his labour party is authentic and i think he is giving us authentic leadership and i think we have an authentic scottish labour party, as well. and that's why i think we have done a greatjob in getting the labour party away from a discussion about whether it survives in scotland to now actually talking about making significant gains and leading the way and delivering a uk labour government and maximising scotland's influence at the heart of a labour government, making decisions to benefit people here in scotland. are labour going to win the general election? look, i hope so, but i'm not taking anything for granted. the polls, of course, many people point to the polls as a positive indication of that general election and labour being able to win. but there's many, many an example of — not just in this country but around the world — where labour parties have gone into elections with significant leads and those leads have narrowed in an actual election campaign. so no complacency. we don't take our foot off the gas. if anything, we now work harder to make sure we get this over the line, that we finally get rid of this rotten tory government and get back to a politics that's about public service and delivering for people across the country and delivering for people here in scotland. so i don't think anything is guaranteed. i don't think any result is decided yet, but we've got to make sure we're winning that case between now and the next general election. anas sarwar, nice to talk to you. my pleasure, my pleasure. thank you very much forjoining us on newscast. i look forward to coming back. good to have you. thanks a lot, cheer. thank you. two labour leaders on one podcast. yeah! blimey! could have had mark drakeford on and then we'd have had three — the leader of welsh labour, the first minister in wales, soon to stand down. i'm intrigued by it, by that conversation. it's actually where ourjobs intersect, isn't it? is the challenge for labour in scotland versus, or it's not really versus, alongside the challenge for them in the rest of the uk and how they get that right. and actually, keir starmer and anas sarwar are at the crux of that... not necessarily dilemma, but not necessarily also easy thing to square. yeah. and we got into that a little bit there, didn't we, with anas sarwar, and i suppose there's a couple of angles you can look at that from. one, on the specifics of this policy, you can look at how much more important, arguably, the energy question is to scotland and particularly to the north east of scotland, because aberdeen and the surrounding area and therefore the wider scottish economy has been anchored in the prosperity that the north sea has provided for decades. and it has been a crucial part of the political argument in scotland for a long time, and there is a lot of concern in aberdeen, particularly, about this transition to green energy, which labour is trying to turn into a positive, which could potentially be a negative if you think jobs are going to go. labour is trying to sayjobs are going to be created. so the detail of how manyjobs and the credibility of labour's plan on that is really important. and then the second thing is obviously the wider point, isn't it, which we talked about, which is labour lost a lot of traditional left wing, democratic—socialist or even socialist voters to the scottish national party a decade or so ago and is very hopeful of winning them back from the snp at this general election. and the snp's riposte to try to hold on to those voters is — you're not authentic, you are not going to deliver the policies that the people of scotland want because you need to appeal to a more right—leaning electorate in england. and that is going to be a big talking point, ithink, i don't know if you agree, throughout this general election. totally. from james and me, that is it for today. thank you for listening. goodbye. good evening. it's certainly been a challenging week of weather, hasn't it, with snow or rain and some of that rain producing some localized flooding. so it was a refreshing start to the weekend, quieter with some sunny spells. that was oxford and here was the lake districtjust a few hours ago, a few scattered showers producing some beautiful rainbow pictures, but all in all, relatively quiet. and it will be a similar story for sunday. we've got to get rid of this nuisance rain that's pushing up through the east of the pennines into eastern scotland overnight. that'll be there first thing. some clearer skies, some early morning sunshine the further west you are. and then as we go through the afternoon, a brisk westerly breeze will drive in a few scattered showers and these will push inland. so, it's another day of sunny spells and scattered showers for many and temperatures around 7 to 11 degrees. we're starting to lose that really bitterly cold air now in scotland. there's more rain to come, though, as we look through the week ahead. the heaviest of the rain into the east to begin with. but then out to the west, we are likely to see a further 50 millimetres of rainfall perhaps in western scotland, wales and south—west england. so, more unsettled story to come. low pressure never too far away. and into monday, that low pressure will be sent into the north west, a weak weather front producing more cloud ahead of it. the showers out to the northwest will be frequent across northern ireland, northwest scotland, and there'll be some snow to the tops of the mountains. england and wales dry with sunshine around. and again, those temperatures generally between six and ten degrees. now, as we move out of monday into tuesday, again, it'll be a relatively quiet start with this little ridge of high pressure, but all eyes down to the southwest as this next weather front will bring some rain slowly but surely into southwest england, wales and gradually across channel coasts towards the midlands by the end of the day. so, the best of the drier weather will be northeast england and into scotland, i suspect, on tuesday. and again, those temperatures pretty similar, seven to 11 degrees. a south—westerly wind is going to continue to take over. that'll drive in more wetter weather potentially through wednesday and thursday and with tightly packed isobars, the breeze picking up. but with that south—westerly flow, it will drive in milder aironce again. so, milder still — we could see temperatures into the mid—teens by the middle part of the week for some. hopefully indications of something a little quieter into next weekend. live from london. this is bbc news. fighting for food in northern gaza, where the un is warning of a looming famine, and children go days without eating. when it comes to the flour, people are actually using animal feed. however, even the animal feed is starting to get scarce in the market and people are not finding it. a six—year—old gazan girl missing after her family's car came under israeli fire is found dead — along with paramedics sent to rescue her. iraq's foreign minister tells the bbc his country could be pushed into conflict by attacks on its territory by iranian—backed militias and us forces. and, an explosion of light and colour as china celebrates the lunar new year, welcoming in the year of the dragon. hello. welcome to the programme. we begin in gaza, where concern is growing over the shortage of food.