Darren Jones, With us. Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Hello. Morning. Good morning. David Cameron. Did you anticipate him getting out that car?

No, there was no leaks, which I suppose was quite interesting. But it's all very exciting here in Westminster, isn't it? We like it when players change on the pitch mid-game. But does it really matter? I don't know.

It might matter.

To you lot. Well, I don't know. I mean, the real question, I think, is whether the change in personnel is really going to change the conservative party's performance on the economy and our public services, and time will tell.

Yeah, but politics, as we know, is all about personalities.

But also their ability to do the job, right?

Boris Johnson was Prime Minister.

Well, and that didn't go very well, did it?

Well, it went very well for quite a long time. He won an election and you had the biggest defeat in 70 years.

Well, that was partly to do with Jeremy Corbyn, not just Boris Johnson, to be honest.

I see, exactly, personalities.

Well, quite. But also we've got a changed Labour Party now. We've got a great shadow cabinet. We're working really hard preparing for the next election. And you would expect me to say this, Kay, but I think we have the plans necessary to turn the country around.

Okay. Are you at all concerned that David Cameron, with his wealth of experience and not least at winning elections, has joined the front bench?

I don't feel very much about it at all, to be honest. I mean, he probably is going to be experienced in being Foreign Secretary because he knows a lot of people as Prime Minister and that's great. I mean, it's probably a bit annoying to a lot of conservative MPs who thought maybe they would be good enough for a job in the cabinet and Rishie Sunak has decided not. But also there's this slightly weird feeling about it that Rishie Sunak has had to look for a grown-up to come back and help him steady the ship when he really, as Prime Minister, should be getting a group of his party in the country.

You wanted Soella out as a party. You wanted her gone as quickly as possible. James Cleveley, some would say, is a safe pair of hands now at the Home Office. You need to be careful what you wish for.

Sure. I mean, what I wish for is for the conservative parties to get a grip on the economy. We know that the economy is still failing for working people. Growth is flatlining, costs are still too high, national debt is through the roof. We've got the autumn statement coming up next week where we'll get into all of that detail. We know that our public services are on the brink of collapse, especially coming into the winter. I just think if people at home are looking at all of the animation over the last 24 hours, they're probably just thinking, Well, what does this really mean for me or my local community? I hope the Conservatives get a grip of that, but there's no evidence that they will, given the last 13 years of their.

Performance in government. I see what you did there. You moved me onto your topic, didn't you? But I'm going to bring you back to the Home Office, if I may, because there's a couple of points I want to bring up, not least policing. Obviously, James Cleveley is going to be in charge of that now. He's going to be much more, I'm guessing, police-friendly. He was involved with the police committee when he was over at City Hall, working with the Mayor of London, and also the Boates. He's feeling pretty confident that he can sort that out. That was one of the first things he mentioned when he went to his new department.

Yeah, did he say how?

I don't.

Know, did he? No. I mean, this is another example. I mean, it's all well and good putting out some witty tweets, but what we really need is a plan that's going to work. And Rishie Sunak has been saying time and time again, I've got a plan, my plan is working. It's not. I mean, the evidence is clear that it's not. And if the reshuffle means they're going to get a grip of this, great. But is there any evidence of that? No. And that's why I think people are just looking at whatever it is that Rishie Sunak is doing and thinking he's just trying to score political points in what we all really want. It's just a general election.

And that's why the policing of Marches is concerned?

What's the question?

My question is, do you think that James Cleveley is a better person to be able to give the police the support that they need in order to police these protests better?

Oh, yes. I think James Cleverley is much better than Swellah Braverman. I think the way she behaved was appalling, and it's right that she was sacked. That's why I called for it last week and I hope that change is something that we see in practice. But again, I'll just go back to my first point, which is what people at home want is to see the economy turning around, the economy growing, feeling better off.

I'm coming to that. I'm coming to that. I do the questions. Let me ask you before we go on to what you'd like to talk about. What's going to happen on Wednesday with an amendment by the Scottish Nationalist Party to the King's speech where basically if the speaker agrees, you and your colleagues will be allowed to vote on whether there should be a ceasefire in Gaza that is important to people at home. Should it be a free vote or should you be whipped?

I will answer the question, but the first thing to say is we don't actually know whether there's going to be a vote or not yet. That's what I said. I'm just clarifying the position. The speaker has to decide whether this amendment is voted on or not. We won't know that until Wednesday morning. But secondly, to answer your question directly, the Labour Party policy is clear on this and that should be whipped in the proper way.

Okay, so even those who potentially will feel that they need to step back from the front benches because in all conscience, they can't vote with Kirstama on this? What should.

Happen to them? I'd just say on the conscience point, because I think this is really important, that nobody wants to see what's happening happening in the Middle East, right? I mean, that's absolutely clear. We should be clear about if there is a vote, what this vote is on Wednesday, it's an amendment to the King's speech. It doesn't achieve anything. It's a performative statement that says something that people believe in. That's fine. People can believe in what's in that amendment, and they can vote for that if they want to do so. But it won't actually change anything in the Middle East. And that's why you've got to have a really clear policy as why we're working with allies, why we're working with the government, quite frankly, to make sure that we're taking a united approach to how Britain can be helpful in the Middle East with our allies in the United States and the European Union. That's different to signing early-day motions or petitions in the House of Common or voting on amendments. What Palestinian.

Representatives that way you are you trying to say? I'm trying to say to you where you were in the last hour saying if you don't vote in favour of this, in other words, voting for a ceasefire, whatever that might mean, then you are morally corrupt.

Look, it's that language that is deeply unhelpful, because look, Kay, if for a moment I thought that voting for an amendment on a King's speech would actually affect a cease-fire in the Middle East, I would vote for it. Absolutely, I would. -it's symbolism. -we would all vote for it. Well, it is symbolism because it doesn't achieve anything. What it does is it just says something, when actually what you have to do is to try to work with partners in what is a very complicated set of circumstances, changing every day to try to get to peace, which we all want. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't say that politicians are morally corrupt or have no conscience because of the way that they sign a petition or don't sign a petition or vote or something that doesn't have any meaning.

Okay, well, there we go. You want to talk about the Office for Budget Responsibility. Who doesn't? Me.

Well, I'm glad we got there. Tell me. Look, the Office for Budget Responsibility is an independent body set up by George Osborne when he was Chancellor. He might be back, who knows? Well, let's see. I think there's lots of jobs going and not a lot of talent, apparently, in the Tory Party. But let's go back to the OBR. They give an independent report about what politicians are saying on the economy. That's really important. One of the issues that happened when Liz Trust and Quazie Kutang crashed the economy is they blocked the OBR from producing their independent report. What we are voting on today in the House of Commons is a Labour amendment to the King's speech that will say that the OBR should be given the legal powers to produce an independent assessment whenever there's a major change in fiscal policy or Treasury policy, and that we would put that in place if we were in government at the next election.

Okay, well, we'll look forward to that vote. Very good. It's nice to see you. -thanks to see you. -thanks to see you. -thanks very much, David, for joining us.