Secretary of State. For a go anywhere else with this interview, how does that sound? Secretary of State.

It's the first time I've had that in an interview, and it does feel very special on a personal level to have had that experience of being asked to walk up Downing Street to go into an office that used to belong to Winston Churchill in the old Admiralty, the Department of Business and Trade. Really, really personally significant. But obviously, the most exciting bit is to be able to get on with the job and deliver on the mandate that we've received.

Indeed. Indeed. The last but one Labor Prime Minister, Tony Blair, doesn't waste any time in telling you how you should get on the job. His top thing, I gather, is that he says that you need a plan for migration. That implies that he thinks you don't actually have one, and that because you don't have one, you risk the rise of the National populace. That's a rather stinging assessment of the Labor campaign, isn't it?

I think he mentions immigration once in a a 100-word article, but the policies we put forward in the election are, I think, what the country needs. It's not just about tackling illegal immigration, important as that is. We've got to look at legal migration. We've got to look at the relationship to the skills system. Why, for instance, have there been jobs on the shortage occupations list now for 15 years or since the list came into existence? The sense of it not responding to real market conditions, relying too much on immigration, even though I will always welcome people who want to come to contribute to the UK. Changes to the apprenticeship levy that we put forward. We have a plan for that, and it's about a much closer linkage between migration.

Well, that's interesting because he's pretty clear that he doesn't seem to think you have a plan. In a typical Blair phrase, he says, If you don't have rules, you will have prejudices. What that implies that he thinks you haven't actually laid out any rules. You might have projects, but you don't have rules. The point I think he's making is labor has to get a grip on legal migration numbers, and he wants to see what you're going to do about that. What is it? Would you, for example, back his call for ID cards?

Well, the new Home Secretary will be looking at all sources of advice when it comes to that. But I would just say we have backed the points-based immigration system. We made difficult decisions, particularly when we thought legal migration was too high. I think it has to come down. Again, I'll say that whilst always welcoming people who do make a contribution, come to the UK to do that. I think it's historically high, at a time when public services were under strain, and I think it's right to recognize public concern around that. But look, we made decisions not just in the campaign, but before it, about backing at times decisions, particularly on dependents, which were not easy decisions. We have been doing that. We'll continue to do that, and we want to address those issues.

But what's clear from what you've just said is that you haven't made a decision, but digital ID cards are on the table as one possibility.

Well, look, my colleague, Yvette Cooper, and the rest of the Home Affairs team will be looking at all sources of things. I'm not going to preempt things they may or may not want to do. But I would push back on the assertion that we've not made already. Significant political decisions, recognizing public concern on legal migration, recognizing the system has to work better, but looking at the real answer is not gimmicks, as we saw from the previous government. I'll respect my colleagues taking that agenda forward.

Okay, well, let me put it to you in a slightly different way. Everybody respects Tony Blair, but is this intervention a little bit unhelpful? In the first 48 hours?

I don't think anything is unhelpful. Of course, when you are an incoming government, you're always looking to people who have, frankly, done a job in the past in government. Their expertise, their experience will be invaluable. It's not about harking back to any era, but of course, the people have been in something that resembles a similar position to this incoming government. We'll listen to them, of course, we will.

Well, you say not harking back to another era. It's striking this morning that there are a couple of new appointments, both of which are pure Blaireite era. Jackie Smith, who was at home Secretary, was a Blaire Minister for a long time, and Alan Milburn, actually, who is Blaire Health Secretary, both back in one way or another in Government?

Well, this is a cabinet which has been a mandate in its own right, as its own set of people that knows what its own agenda is, and actually, in historical terms, actually, ground-breaking in some of the representation now we're seeing at the top table of British government. I think, of course, we will use expertise, experience, where it is available. I think, specifically on Alan Milburn, I know he's been working with the health team. I think no announcement has been made around that. But of course, people like Jacky Smith and the experience that they bring, there are a lot of problems for an incoming government to resolve. If people can give us advice, know how the system works, of course, any cabinet member is going to be looking at how they can do that.

All right. Well, another piece of advice he gives you is... He's not clear about it, but he pretty strongly hint that there should be a It's a relationship with the EU. The Irish Prime Minister, Simon Harris, suggests to Sky News this morning that this could be the start of a new relationship. I just want to show you what he says.

Brexit has happened. The people of Britain have made that decision. But absolutely, is there space to have a veterinary agreement? Is there space in terms of student mobility? Is there space to work closer together on issues? I think there absolutely is. I do think there would be a willingness in Europe to have those conversations in due course, should that be the wish of the British Government.

That seems to me a pretty clear opening of the door to a renegotiation of at least some aspects of the trade deal. Are you going to walk through that door? It's your job now.

Well, I welcome that constructive attitude from colleagues. We were right in the campaign to respect Brexit, to not revisit those constitutional arguments. But when it comes to trade, the issue that you've just revealed there in that revealing clip is really about standards on food. We've got the same standards as the European Union. If we can sell more whiskey, more salmon to a market which is so significant to us, of course, we should explore an opportunity like that. I think moving forward, to be frank, a relationship to Europe that is not determined by the internal politics of the conservative Party is very much in the national interest in the UK. We're not going to revisit those constitutional arguments, but of course, where it's in the mutual interests of both the European Union and the UK to work together, that good faith relationship has got to make sense.

No re-entry to EU, no new referendums or anything like that. But it's clear you want a closer relationship with the EU.

Well, I think on things like Food and Agricultural Products Agreement, when we've got the same standards, removing some of those barriers to trade, that makes sense. We have talked, for instance, about recognizing each other's professional qualifications, again, completely sensible, pragmatic. If you are in the creative industries, you've really suffered in your ability to move around the European Union in terms of the restrictions on that. These are practical things. Actually, we have seen a little bit in the last government, we saw the reassociation with Horizon, the science agreement, and the Winsor framework. So clearly, the basis is there to do that. And I welcome constructive colleagues.

It's interesting because you've named three or four things there. And put together, this sounds like the development of a new deal. I mean, to some extent, what Richard Sinnack tried to do, but actually, you seem to be saying that there is space here for a new and more open relationship relationship with the EU. They're going to ask for something. They're going to ask for migration. Are you open to that free movement of people?

I don't think we should preempt that negotiation. We're not open to the free movement of people. That is something which is part of membership of the European Union. As I said, we're not revisiting that. It's not about that. Let's be clear as well. These are things that I think are in the UK's interest. They're also in the EU's interest. That doesn't mean it's an easy negotiation. But of course, we should always be seeking to make those opportunities real for everyone across the UK.

All right. What happened on Thursday was in many ways, historic records broken all over the place, but some of it is also personal. Can I ask about one of your former Shadow cabinet colleagues, Jonathan Ashworth, who I think actually I've interviewed on Sunday mornings even more times than you. Did you feel his absence at yesterday's first cabinet meeting? Because he lost his seat, surprisingly.

I did. I've known Jonathan a long time. He put in incredible service to the campaign. Maybe to his own personal cost in that way. Of course, to be in a political system where you can win a landslide, get that mandate, but lose very close colleagues, that is... British politics is tough. On a personal level, really, someone who'd given so much and has a lot to give, and I hope we can find a role that will allow him to continue to do that.

One of the reasons I ask is that he lost his seating Leicester South. We don't know yet, but it is thought partly because of, if you like, some ethnic rivalries, which is something that's popped up elsewhere within the Labor campaign. In some Birmingham seats, the Labor vote was depressed, particularly in places where there's a large Muslim population. Is this going to be an issue for Labor?

Well, look, we would take the loss of any support seriously. Of course, there's a lot to digest from a set of results where I don't think we've ever really had general election quite like it in terms of the diversity of contests across every bit of the UK. So of course, there's a lot to digest from that take on. I would say we will always, as Keir made clear, the new Prime Minister made clear, we will always put country first, party second. Sometimes there are tough things.

You were hit by the Gaza protest, basically.

I really understand people's frustration. There are particularly younger people in Britain, not just confined to one community, by the way. This is across the board. They've never seen a real peace process in the Middle East. They're frustrated. They see the difficulties that causes, real problems on both sides, incredible human suffering. Of course, they're frustrated by that. What I hope we can now do as a government is show real leadership on the world stage to a real solution to that conflict. I think, to be able to people want to see that progress rather than the words behind it. I do understand that and think we can contribute.

The other thing that's happened, of course, is that you've made these appointments. Prime Minister brought in experts like Patrick Vallance. But as I said, we're seeing the return of some veterans, let's call it, from the Blair era, Jackie Smith, Alan Milburn. How can I put this delicately? Prime Minister had 411 MPs to choose from. Are none of them good enough to do these jobs?

No, it's not about that. I think my generation of Labor MPs can hold our heads high in terms of returning Labor to power and what has happened, particularly in the last Parliament, when people of my intake and age came to the fore in the shadow cabinet as it then was. But we're very much aware that if you can bring in experience of government, if you know people who can make a difference, Douglas Alexander will join my team, for instance, as the Trade Minister.

The former Brown Minister.

Credible expertise, incredible career outside of Parliament since he left after what happened in that election. Of course, you want to use that. I think actually that's a sign of strength that you can bring in, that expertise and confidence you've got to do that.

All right, let's talk about strength. You start with this thumping majority, which is, you would say, is your mandate for change. But let's remember, two-thirds of the voters that did not choose you. Does that really give you the authority to impose what the minority that backed you want on the majority. Let me just make it very specific. The MPs that support your government got less than 24,000 votes for each seat, yet it took half a million votes to elect a Green MP, over 800,000 to elect a reform MP. Is that really a fair system?

Well, first of all, labor has a clear mandate. The first political party in a Generation.

You've got a lot of MPs. You've got two-thirds of the MPs elected with one-third of the vote.

The first political party in a generation to win a majority of seats in England, Wales, and Scotland. That is no small achievement. Our system is about seats. I've been here after elections where we can say, Oh, we piled up votes in a small number of places. That's not how British general elections work. I think it's really important to say that there are results in the past that are similar to this. I don't think you can say a system is unfair just because one side wins it.

This was our strategy. The fact that it was unfair in the past, it doesn't make it any better that it's unfair now.

But let's just be clear, labor has a mandate to govern. There can be no questions around that. I would also say, when it comes to parties like reform and the Green Party, they do get far less scrutiny because they're not seen as parties of government are going to elect significant Now, maybe that should change. I think that's something to address. I met a lot of good people in this campaign who told me they were voting reform. When you explain to them they support in reform the economic policies of Liz Trust and the foreign policies of Vladimir Putin, they're horrified. Now they're in Parliament, they'll get the level of scrutiny they deserve.

Yeah, but look, I'm not being partisan. I don't want to be partisan here. This is an issue about democracy. Let me show you this chart. I think most fair-minded people would ask themselves, Is this really right? You got 33.7% of the votes, not far off what you got last time, less than you got under Corbyn when you got spanked. But you got two-thirds, nearly, of the seats. The Lib Dems down there, they are more or less okay. But reform on the Greens, less than 1% of the seats, but reform, one in seven votes. Greens, 7%. I'm just asking you, really, as a Democrat rather than as a government minister, is that really sustainable?

I have talked in the past about my own views on this thing, but I would say when you've got a system, you run your campaign to win under that system. Now, you can't then look at it through a different lens. We have had elections in the past where labor has had these extraordinary majorities in a small number of places. That's not good enough. We are not a party of protest, or you can't look at vote, especially when people vote tactically. That's part of the system under first past the post. We had to get a mandate to government to replace this former failing conservative government. We've done that, and I think you've got to recognize that the campaign will reflect the system required to get that mandate to win.

Let me put you something that's happening right across Europe, and that is in a way the advance of what people call Nationalist populism. Let me ask you first question, specifically about labor. How do it feel to be indebted to Nigel Farage for the size of your victory? Because this It only happened, really, because he divided the vote and the right.

No, again, I reject that. I think the idea that somehow, if the conservative party with its record, would simply have seen votes transfer automatically to labor as the alternative. That isn't how it happens. Labor had to earn the right to be the party that could win this election. That was not something that happened by accident. It happened with Keir Starmer's leadership. The idea that someone else is the active agent in that happening, I'm sorry, no, it is down to labor and being a party willing to acknowledge its defense.

We will argue the talk about the numbers, but I just wanted to ask you lastly about something that's happening today, which is, I think, relevant. Tonight, Marine Le Pen will probably become the leader of the largest party in France, his Parliament, with a bigger share of the vote in France, and you won here. Are you looking forward to negotiating with a new trade relationship with France, with the EU, under Manon Le Pen's leadership?

Well, you know I'm going to say any election in France is down to the people of France to decide that. I would say more generally, it's wrong to think of trade relationships and trade treaties in particular as being with the political leadership at any one time of the country, whether that is in France, whether that is in the USA. Those are long-term relationships that outlive, if you do them properly, whoever is in charge at any one moment. It's about two countries, not sets of political leaders, and the long-term national interest will always be what we're putting forward in trade policy from a new labor government.