{"id":257675,"date":"2025-07-12T01:33:10","date_gmt":"2025-07-12T01:33:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/257675\/"},"modified":"2025-07-12T01:33:10","modified_gmt":"2025-07-12T01:33:10","slug":"resetting-franco-british-relations-the-cross-channel-contract","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/257675\/","title":{"rendered":"Resetting Franco-British relations \u2014 the cross-channel contract"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is an audio transcript of the Political Fix<\/a> podcast episode: \u2018Resetting Franco-British relations \u2014 the cross-channel contract<\/a>\u2019<\/p>\n

Emmanuel Macron in audio clip
<\/strong>Do not misunderstand me. I\u2019m not going so far as to say that England gave birth to the French Revolution. (Laughter) However, I have to confess that we love monarchy, but especially when it\u2019s not at home. (Laughter) <\/p>\n

[MUSIC PLAYING]<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Welcome to Political Fix with me, George Parker. <\/p>\n

You just heard Emmanuel Macron addressing MPs and peers during his state visit this week. The French president arrived on UK shores on Monday, sweeping through Westminster and Windsor on the first state visit by the leader of an EU country since Brexit. Macron\u2019s visit spurred a flurry of announcements including a vaunted crackdown on migration, closer defence cooperation and the news that the Bayer tapestry will be heading to London for a star-loaned turn at the British Museum, all part of what Macron described as the new \u2018entente amicale\u2019. What does this special cross-channel relationship mean for the UK and what could go wrong? <\/p>\n

Here to discuss it are my colleagues Anna Gross. Hi, Anna.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Hi, George.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Our politics columnist, writer of the Inside Politics newsletter, Stephen Bush.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Hi, George.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And from Switzerland, the FT\u2019s Europe editor and former Paris correspondent, Ben Hall. Bonjour, Ben!<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Bonjour, George!<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>So let\u2019s kick off by talking about the overarching UK relationship with the French. Our colleague, Janan Ganesh wrote an excellent column this week about the necessary relationship between the UK and France, Western Europe\u2019s only nuclear powers with seats at the UN Security Council and a bit more in common than either side would like to admit.<\/p>\n

Ben, you covered the last state visit by a French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, I think it was back in 2008. How was the relationship between the two countries evolved since then?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Well it\u2019s funny that during that visit in 2008, I remember that Sarkozy called it also an \u2018entente amicale\u2019 and then Gordon Brown tried to counter it and called it, no, let\u2019s have an \u2018entente formidable\u2019. It was a slightly cringe-making moment. (Laughter)<\/p>\n

So we go through these sort of ritualistic state visits, these moments of rapprochement between these two great nations. And actually, after that summit, it was followed up with real substance between Sarkozy and Cameron with the Lancaster House Treaty, which ushered in even deeper defence cooperation between these two countries. <\/p>\n

And then of course, the relationship was destroyed essentially by Brexit, where Macron played a particularly hard line role in making sure the Brits couldn\u2019t cherry pick the advantages of Brexit while being outside. So it became somewhat of a villain, I think, for Britain\u2019s political class.<\/p>\n

But now we are in fence-mending mode and the reason, frankly, is that both sides know that even though they have many historic rivalries and differences, and there is still some lingering distrust between them, that the commonalities, the common interests between these two countries are enormous, especially in an age where Donald Trump is ripping up the rules-based international order and turning on his allies.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Ben, just a little side note. You heard Emmanuel Macron at the beginning there joking at Westminster about France\u2019s love of the monarchy. What is it about the French and our royal family?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Well, I have a theory which is actually France is as monarchical as the UK. In some ways it\u2019s even more monarchical than the UK. We are a parliamentary monarchy, they are a republican monarchy. But, you know, you have a much weaker parliament, although it\u2019s found its voice over the last year. <\/p>\n

But the French president in the Fifth Republic is a fairly monarchical figure, a huge power centralised in the \u00c9lys\u00e9e Palace. So I think there\u2019s a bit of an irony in thinking that the French are the antithesis to the British. In many ways, they\u2019re not, they are actually quite similar.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Yeah, exactly. <\/p>\n

Now, Stephen, Brexit \u2014 which President Macron described as deeply disappointing, and a number of salvos against that project. It was obviously a big rupture in the relationship, as Ben said. Do you think it can ever really recover?<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Yes, I think it can, partly because, you know, as Ben was setting out, before Brexit, the Anglo-French relationship was actually in some ways the strongest it had ever been for good and for ill, right?<\/p>\n

You had Lancaster House, but you also had the deeply ill-advised joint military adventure of Libya. But when you consider the pressures that both countries face in their own neighbourhood, although of course they have many, many reasons to be close allies, although of course there\u2019s a kind of Brexit-style cloud on the horizon, which is more might happen in the next French presidential election.<\/p>\n

But if that can be avoided, then yeah, I mean, geography really matters. The reason why Brexit is a bad idea is also why I think the French-British relationship is doomed to succeed.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Yes, indeed. But there are still clouds on the horizon caused by Brexit, of course, including France being one of those countries laying down very harsh terms or tough terms at least in terms of British access to a new European defence fund, so-called SAFE.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Yeah, and I mean, it feels to me like the quintessential Macron achievement in some ways, right? And he\u2019s persuaded the EU to have this defence fund, but in practise, the only countries which might use it to re-arm, who can\u2019t borrow at a lower rate are Britain and Turkey, both of whom he\u2019s saying can\u2019t use the defence fund. And it\u2019s kind of, what\u2019s the point of it?<\/p>\n

But I mean, I think, quite rightly, everyone has their own domestic and political interests, but I find it hard to see that the UK won\u2019t eventually get access to that. And for the same reason, well as I said, right?<\/p>\n

If you have this fund in Turkey and the United Kingdom can\u2019t use it, you essentially have a fund that in the event that Spanish politics would have a complete revolution, might be useful then, but otherwise is just dead money.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Yeah. Now, Anna, on the subject of Brexit, President Macron, his closing press conference at Northwood, the military headquarters, was saying that Brexit actually made it harder to agree the kind of returns agreements that\u2019s been talked about this week and so on. We had a whole not very convincing political cliffhanger the whole of this week, didn\u2019t we, about would they, wouldn\u2019t they agree this returns agreement to tackle migration? Can you explain what was agreed?<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Yeah, so there are still some unknowns as of Thursday evening when we\u2019re talking, but essentially the agreement is it\u2019s a pilot scheme between the UK and France \u2014 that the UK will send back a small number of people who come across the channel to claim asylum pretty much immediately, is what Starmer said. And it will receive a reciprocal number of people in Calais in France waiting who are trying to come over to the UK.<\/p>\n

And so it will specifically focus on people who have a kind of legitimate right to be here, most notably people who have family here.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Yeah, I suppose the big question is will it work?<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>I think that is the huge question mark over this whole thing. You know, a lot of experts are saying that it entirely rests on the scale. If it\u2019s just a very small number of people and currently they\u2019re thinking it will be about 50 people a week when there are about 800 roughly who are coming over.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>So about 1 in 17 people arriving.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Exactly. And at that scale, it\u2019s very hard to imagine it actually acting as a deterrent effect. And that\u2019s the whole point of this. France is actually breaking something it has said for years it would never do. This has been something that the UK has asked for again and again. Can we return some of the people who arrive here back to France? We think that this will deter people making that journey. France has said, no, we\u2019re not gonna do that. So I think it is genuinely a bit of a coup that they\u2019ve got . . .<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Groundbreaking as Keir Starmer.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Groundbreaking genuinely as Keir Starmer says. But the question is, the reason France is doing it is because it\u2019s buying into this idea that it could potentially work as a deterrent. <\/p>\n

But it\u2019s just hard to imagine that if you\u2019re one of those asylum seekers, you\u2019ve made that perilous journey, you\u2019ve travelled across the world, you put your life in danger, you arrived at Calais, and there\u2019s a 16 out of 17 chance that you will make it to Britain, go through the asylum system and potentially make a life for yourself here, that you\u2019re gonna not do it when you get there.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And if you are returned, surely the first thing you\u2019re gonna do is head back to the beaches.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Well, the other problem with it is that getting on a boat costs you money, right? Most of the time, because most of it\u2019s not human trafficking. But one possible downside consequences if you get returned, you\u2019ve used all of the money you have saved to get right and you end up going, oh, well, I\u2019ve got no choice, but to end up being trafficked into the United Kingdom.<\/p>\n

So instead of ending up here in a hotel, being processed, eventually ending up in the regular economy, you come here via traffic. Yeah, you\u2019re trafficked into the United Kingdom, you never have your immigration status regularised. So you maybe end up with the same problem, but with the added problem that increases the size of the criminal economy here.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>And also, I think one thing that hasn\u2019t really been acknowledged, so they\u2019re claiming it\u2019s going to have this deterrent effect, but theoretically, if for what every one person that\u2019s sent back, one person is allowed legally to come across, you could argue that it would have the same kind of pull factor effect.<\/p>\n

If people know that maybe when they get to Calais, they don\u2019t have to make that really, really dangerous journey. They actually do have a cousin or an auntie or an uncle who lives in Britain. And they might actually be one of those one in 17 people who are allowed to come over.<\/p>\n

There are no safe and legal routes for them to come. They\u2019ll think, maybe this is the only safe and legal route for me.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And Ben, one of the potential glitch in this, and I think President Macron alluded to it, was that he would have to get an agreement with his EU partners. What\u2019s the problem with this scheme as far as some of the European countries are concerned?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Well, when it first emerged, in fact, I think in the pages of the FT and a scoop, I think that some resistance in other capitals, particularly in southern Europe. So those are the states where most migrants enter the EU first. They don\u2019t like this idea very much because they think it involves Britain sending migrants back to them. And since Britain is not part of the EU, it should not, in theory, benefit from the Dublin regulation, which was the system that is still in place in the EU, which obliges asylum seekers to seek asylum in the place where they first entered.<\/p>\n

I totally agree with what you say about the small numbers here and the fact that it might not have a deterrent effect, but I do also agree that this is quite a big concession from Macron, because in a way what he\u2019s trying to do is recreate Britain\u2019s, in a small way, at the beginning, membership of that Dublin system.<\/p>\n

The challenge for Britain is that it will only work for the Europeans if Britain also takes in, maybe if it\u2019s one or one, but it does its fair share. Because we have to remember that Britain is receiving fewer asylum seekers than most EU countries. France, last year, had 130,000, I think the UK had 100,000. Most of whom, I think, come in through small boats. Spain has 160,000, Italy has 140,000 last year.<\/p>\n

So, Britain can\u2019t close itself off from this problem. This is a Europe-wide problem and you do need some kind of coordinated solution to it. And I think maybe Macron has opened the door for Keir Starmer to go in that direction. I don\u2019t think it can only be about deterrent effect. It\u2019s about having a fairer share of burden sharing across Europe.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And one other thing that Keir Starmer was stressing during that joint press conference on Thursday was the idea that we would tighten up enforcement in the labour market, you know, some more checks against irregular working in the labour market, which has long been and hasn\u2019t a big demand of the French that we become like the Shangri-La for asylum seekers just because it\u2019s easy to disappear into the black economy.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Absolutely and I was in Paris in 2021 for a stint and back then they were talking about the same thing, that the big thing that\u2019s driving people across to Britain is the pull factors here. It\u2019s the fact that once you get into Britain, there\u2019s no one really checking.<\/p>\n

And you know, when you talk to migration experts, and these are not politically motivated groups and they\u2019ve done surveys of many, many, many migrants, you know, that the culture in Britain is definitely one of the factors that\u2019s brought up. But I think another, that there are other major things like language, the fact that a lot of people who come over, English is the only language in European countries that they speak. There are many people who have relatives who are here.<\/p>\n

So I think, you know, that this idea that it\u2019s all rosy and, you know, really easy to live here once you come here is not, I don\u2019t think it\u2019s really born out by the fact.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Stephen, can we move on to another part of the Anglo-French agreement which was on defence cooperation and this idea that we would both essentially put our nuclear forces at the disposal of each other, we\u2019d face common threats. That\u2019s quite a big moment, isn\u2019t it?<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Yeah, I think it is quite a big moment, partly because what was one of the big sort of scaremongering talking points during the referendum campaign was this idea that there was going to be a European army and that we\u2019ll be dragged into this against our will. And although there are like really important security and geopolitical considerations which are why we have our deterrent, a nuclear deterrent is also a bit of a virility symbol for the countries that have it.<\/p>\n

So to share it with, OK, admittedly a country that hasn\u2019t been a geopolitical rival for going on for the best part of 200 years now. But your historic and traditional geopolitical rival I think is quite a big concession\u2009.\u2009.\u2009.\u2009yeah, I guess a concession to reality rather than a concession to France or anyone else. But I think in terms of significant moments in the life of the United Kingdom, particularly after Brexit, I think it\u2019s quite a big deal.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Ben, what did you think of it, because we all know that France has jealously guarded the independence of its nuclear deterrent, the force de frappe, what do you make of it?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>I thought it was a pretty significant concession by the French, not really a British one, but a big one by France. I think we should be clear this is not about sharing the nuclear deterrent. No French president would agree to do that, I think. But it\u2019s still significant because France, as you say, George, regards the force de frappe as it\u2019s a deterrent for the nation. That was slightly softened. In fact, even de Gaulle said it had a kind of European dimension to it.<\/p>\n

But given the fact that we now cannot be sure of America\u2019s nuclear guarantee and commitment to collective defence, the Europeans do want to see the Brits and the French work together in order to extend their nuclear umbrella as far as they can. And I think this was another step in that process that Macron himself seems to want to go down. <\/p>\n

It\u2019s very tentative and I noticed that in the press conference, he talked about he wouldn\u2019t exclude coordinating with Britain on the nuclear use. So it was even then he was sort of softening it somewhat. We should of course remember that Britain already shares its nuclear deterrent as part of the NATO\u2019s nuclear planning group, France does not. <\/p>\n

So I think this was quite a big concession by the French and I think it is emblematic of the times that we\u2019re in, and the fact that as Macron said in his speech in Westminster, you know, Britain and France have a special responsibility for European security. And this was a, I think him putting a bit of tiny bit of flesh on those bones.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And Stephen, Janan Ganesh made the point in his column that pending the big expected increase in German defence expenditure, at least until the end of the decade, is vitally important for European security and of course in the context of Ukraine that France and Britain continue to play a leadership role. Have you been encouraged by this week\u2019s events?<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Yeah, I think, (inaudible) as Janan sets out, yeah. Hopefully by 2029, the time of the next UK election, American politics will have shifted back and it will be kind of redundant. But I think given Downing Street\u2019s anxiety about anything which might upset reform voters or leave voters, it\u2019s heartening to see that actually he is willing to make these quite big gestures of a kind that, you know, for a long time Downing Street was quite paranoid about doing anything which might look like softening Brexit. <\/p>\n

The fact that we\u2019ve had a week in which he\u2019s signed up to these accords, in which Emmanuel Macron has said in multiple different ways Brexit was a bad idea, and we haven\u2019t felt a need to kind of throw the toys out of the pram and ruin some of his, yeah, it\u2019s a heartening moment for the UK.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Yeah, and Ben, just for one final overview of the political elements of this week\u2019s events. You said that you thought it was quite a big concession that Macron made on the returns agreement, you think it was quite a big concession he made on independence of France nuclear deterrent. <\/p>\n

What did France get out of it? And does this whole thing support the idea that Starmer\u2019s not too bad at this international diplomacy lark?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>I certainly think Starmer has been much more impressive on the international diplomacy than the domestic agenda, (overlapping speech). But he has been pretty impressive, a little bit of a slow start. He was a little non-committal, it felt, on Ukraine, but then he really threw himself into that. And he has made himself a sort of coordinating force within Europe in support of Ukraine. And I think that\u2019s been very impressive. <\/p>\n

And of course, he\u2019s also hit it off to a degree as best as anybody can with Donald Trump. So I think he has been impressive on the diplomatic track. I think for the French, they know that they need the Brits and in fact Macron said that. <\/p>\n

You know, Britain is, as he says, has a special role to play in Europe by dint of its military power and its full spectrum capabilities. Germany will become a much more powerful player, as Janan wrote, but doesn\u2019t really have the same strategic culture that Britain and France do. It\u2019s really vital that France and Britain work together to guarantee Europe\u2019s security. <\/p>\n

I think this summit, although so much attention was on small boats, I think the French, and I\u2019m pretty sure I would imagine Downing Street too, are desperate that this relationship is not defined by small boats. It should be defined by security co-operation, defence co-operation, because it is gonna be the big, huge issue for the coming years.<\/p>\n

[MUSIC PLAYING]<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Now, of course, one other big thing that was announced this week on the cultural front, which I suspect might be almost of equal significance in importance to some people, is the imminent arrival on loan of the Bayeux tapestry to London. Can you just explain what\u2019s been agreed there?<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Yeah, so this has been about six years in the making. Really intense negotiations going on between French officials and British officials. But essentially, what\u2019s been agreed is that the Bayeux tapestry, which is this 11th century tapestry depicting the Norman conquest, is going to be given to the British Museum. <\/p>\n

And in exchange, Britain is going to loan to France treasures that were found in the Sutton Hoo burial ship. And yes, this has been years in the making and it\u2019s a real coup But you know way more about this, George. And you\u2019ve been writing about it this week. So tell us about that.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Well, I became sort of slightly intrigued by this whole thing because someone said to me that the V&A museum would have their noses put out of joint by all this. And I thought, why was that? And as you say, this has been going on since 2018 when the V&A thought that President Macron had suggested that the tapestry could be loaned out to the V&A because there was a plan to close for refurbishment, the Bayeux Museum, where the tapestry\u2019s currently being displayed. <\/p>\n

And so the V&A set up this conservation partnership with the Bayeux museum and they were all expecting it to come and then suddenly out of the blue, in conditions of total diplomatic secrecy, the British government had negotiated with the French government for the tapestry to come to the British museum instead. <\/p>\n

And as you say, in exchange, the treasures found in this burial ship at Sutton Hoo will be going to Normandy. And it\u2019s a sort of fascinating sort of bit of cultural diplomacy. But I think what\u2019s really interesting is people have drawn parallels with an exhibition, which I don\u2019t remember personally, but people still talk about it in reverential terms. <\/p>\n

Tutankhamun exhibition at the British Museum in 1972. People were saying this will be the biggest blockbuster exhibition seen in Britain since then for 50 odd years. It\u2019s going to be a really, really big thing when it arrives in 2026.<\/p>\n

The hullabaloo around its arrival. It was stitched together, we believe at least, in Canterbury, but it hasn\u2019t been in the UK for 900 odd years. So it\u2019s an amazing thing. And Stephen, I just wonder whether you see this cultural exchange as being a template potentially for an even more sensitive exchange on the Elgin Marbles, which has been discussed for some time.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Yeah, I mean, I think the irony is, of course, that the Bayeux tapestry is hugely important to the story of how England came to be and therefore how eventually the United Kingdom came to be, but it doesn\u2019t have the same emotional and political resonance that the Parthenon sculptures have in modern Greek politics, even though the history is a bit more complicated. <\/p>\n

But I think the difference is that when the sculptures move, which I think they will do at some point over the next four years, because Keir Starmer really cares about international diplomacy. Greece is a key ally of ours. It matters really, it matters a huge amount to the Greek nation. And although the way that it will be finessed is it\u2019ll be a talk of a loan in exchange for some Greek treasures that have never been here before. Once the sculptures go to the Acropolis, they\u2019re not gonna come back. <\/p>\n

But anyone who\u2019s seen this\u2009.\u2009.\u2009.\u2009Yeah, so the British Museum is my local museum. It\u2019s about 15 minutes walk from where I am. And, yeah, it\u2019s a model of this exchange, because there are loads of things in there that loads of other people would like to display occasionally, and there are loads of things that we would like to be able to display here in other museums. <\/p>\n

But yeah, the difference is that I don\u2019t think anyone expects that when the, when two years come up, we\u2019re gonna be like, no, we are keeping the tapestry, whereas we all know that the marbles ain\u2019t coming back. So, you know, you should visit Russell Square now while you can still see them in London, although the replicas look much nicer in the Acropolis than the real ones do in the British Museum.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Which, if you haven\u2019t been to see it, is an incredible museum in Athens. Ben, are the French public going to be excited about what they\u2019re getting in return?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>I don\u2019t think they\u2019re gonna be so excited. I don\u2019t think Sutton Hoo quite has the same cultural weight as the Bayeux tapestry, so there\u2019s a bit of inequality in the size of the blockbuster, if you like.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>As a boring historian, I feel I should stand up for Sutton Hoo, which is a really interesting find, really illuminates a period of history. And we still don\u2019t actually know all that much about, but yes, I accept it is probably more one for the nerds than the tapestry is.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Now, before we finish on this section, I just want to ask you, are you excited about the Bayeux tapestry? Are you going to see it?<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>I\u2019m so excited to see what the British Museum does with it, I\u2019m really excited to see how they choose to curate it. You know, because the thing everyone kind of forgets about France and particularly England is that they are two different countries that used to be one country in some ways, and in some ways were one country before they were the two countries they are. There are so many interesting curatorial decisions you could make with it. <\/p>\n

I think, you know, the British Museum, which has been poorly led for a long time, but now is actually quite well-led, I think they\u2019re gonna do great events. I am genuinely so excited about this development. <\/p>\n

[MUSIC PLAYING]<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Well, we\u2019ve just got time for our political stock picks. Who are you buying or selling this week, Anna?<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>I am selling Bridget Phillipson, who is the education secretary. I think she\u2019s already having a little bit of a rough time. There\u2019s been some briefing about her in recent months, but after the summer recess, there\u2019s gonna be a really difficult debate and potential backbench rebellion over forthcoming reforms to the special education needs system. And she\u2019s gonna be at the helm of that. <\/p>\n

And it\u2019s essentially, it\u2019s gonna boil down to the eligibility criteria for the plans that kids need to get the kind of highest level of state support. And it looks like that eligibility criteria is going to be tightened. You know, as much as they\u2019re saying they\u2019re really preparing for this, they\u2019re consulting as much as they can. I think it is gonna be really messy and it\u2019s ultimately gonna be Bridget Phillipson\u2019s responsibility.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>I thought it was very interesting that Bridget Phillipson at cabinet this week told her colleagues she would proceed with care in brackets, unlike with welfare reforms. So we\u2019ll see whether she can pull that one off. <\/p>\n

Ben, who are you buying or selling?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Well, I\u2019m sticking to the cross-channel theme of the week, and I\u2019m gonna pick\u00a0S\u00e9bastien Lecornu, who is sitting there listening to Macron deliver his address in Westminster. He\u2019s the French defence minister and has been, clearly, got his fingerprints on many of these Anglo-French defence initiatives. <\/p>\n

The reason I\u2019m mentioning him is because he\u2019s only up. I\u2019m pretty sure he will be the next French prime minister because Macron is fed up with\u00a0Bayrou who seems to be doing nothing and is completely paralysed. And I would wager\u00a0that the (inaudible) will be in the matignon as the prime minister\u2019s office is known by the autumn.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Great tip, Stephen.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>I am going to buy Reform. So Jake Berry, former Conservative MP for Rossendale and Darwen, former Conservative chairman, so arguably a cabinet minister, has defected this week. I think the reason why this is a significant coup for Reform is that the Conservatives, unlike the Labour party, are very, very fond of giving second acts to MPs who lose their seats. <\/p>\n

And there are a number of distinguished people, Andrew Mitchell, Norman Fowler, who lost marginal seats, actually came back in the same safe seat of Sutton Coldfield, then went on to have successful cabinet careers. Michael Fallon lost his Darlington seat, ended up in Sevenoaks, and then you have a number of other people who have had less successful careers in their second act, but nonetheless did get safe seats for life afterwards. <\/p>\n

Jake Berry is someone who, you know, supported Remain and supported Liz Truss, which I think gives you an idea that he\u2019s someone who\u2019s basically a get-on-to-get-along\u00a0 guy who\u2019s ambitious for himself. And I think then if you have people like that going, oh, do you know what, maybe I\u2019m going to join reform. <\/p>\n

That is, I think, a sign that people on the right of the (inaudible), what was the right (inaudible) who would otherwise have a future in the Tory party going, actually, do you know what, I think Reform is here to stay? And it\u2019s the kind of thing which the more and more politicians believe it and act on it, the more and more it becomes true. So it\u2019s a great week for Reform. George, who are you buying or selling?<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>I\u2019m gonna be buying the former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, who we didn\u2019t mention in the context of the tapestry. But of course, he\u2019s now the chair of the British Museum, was involved behind the scenes in the negotiations to get the tapestry there, also very heavily involved in discussions with the Greek government about this potential loan of the, inverted commas of the Parthenon sculptures to Athens. <\/p>\n

So I think he\u2019s done a good job. We also learned, by the way, I didn\u2019t know this, but I think it\u2019s fascinating that he was being lined up as a potential British ambassador to Washington. Of course,\u00a0 that job went to Peter Mandelson in the end, but fascinating. And just hearing him this week on the Today programme talking about sculptures and stuff, but also talking a bit, almost like it is an elder statesman about the economic difficulties facing the government. <\/p>\n

Just remind me, he\u2019s a kind of interesting character George Osborne. I always get ridiculed by my kids when I say this, but of all the politicians I\u2019ve covered in my job, I\u2019ve found George Osborne one of the most interesting ones, both in terms of his grasp of the tactics of politics, his enjoyment of the devilment of the whole thing but also the fact he had a strategic vision of what he wanted to achieve. So I\u2019m going to be buying George Osborne. So Stephen, thank you very much.<\/p>\n

Stephen Bush
<\/strong>Thanks for having me.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Anna, thanks for coming on.<\/p>\n

Anna Gross
<\/strong>Thanks, George.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>And Ben, from your mountain fastness, where else are you in Switzerland?<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>I\u2019m in the Bernese Oberland.<\/p>\n

George Parker
<\/strong>Fantastic. Have a great holiday. Thanks very much for coming today.<\/p>\n

Ben Hall
<\/strong>Cheers, George!<\/p>\n

George Parker<\/strong>
And that\u2019s it for this episode of the FT\u2019s Political Fix. I\u2019ve put links to subjects discussed in this episode in the show notes. Do check them out. They\u2019re articles we\u2019ve made free for Political Fix listeners. <\/p>\n

There\u2019s also a link there to Stephen\u2019s award-winning Inside Politics newsletter which you\u2019ll get 30 days for free. <\/p>\n

Political Fix was presented by me, George Parker, and produced by Lulu Smyth. Flo Phillips is the executive producer. Original music and sound engineering by Breen Turner. Broadcast engineers are Andrew Georgiades and Rod Fitzgerald and Manuela Saragosa is the FT\u2019s acting co-head of audio. <\/p>\n

Until next time, goodbye.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"This is an audio transcript of the Political Fix podcast episode: \u2018Resetting Franco-British relations \u2014 the cross-channel contract\u2019…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":126110,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5018,3,4],"tags":[748,393,4884,1144,712,16,15,1764],"class_list":{"0":"post-257675","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-britain","8":"category-uk","9":"category-united-kingdom","10":"tag-britain","11":"tag-england","12":"tag-great-britain","13":"tag-northern-ireland","14":"tag-scotland","15":"tag-uk","16":"tag-united-kingdom","17":"tag-wales"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114837691085204914","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257675","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=257675"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257675\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/126110"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257675"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257675"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257675"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}