Indeed. Blair's knowledge, grasp of detail, intelligence and sharpness was and still is head and shoulders above any other senior British politician. What I'd give to have him as PM as head of another Labour government.
That's because Blair was a much better communicator than Theresa May. He didn't win 3 general elections for nothing. He was however more dangerous. Tony Blair had the ability to sell ice to Eskimos back then.
Well he didn't really have a viable opposition. William Hague was pathetic and weak, followed by Ian Duncan Smith who could not survive a full parliament before being booted out by his own MPs and then Michael Howard, a ghost from the Thatcher government. He would of course win in 2001. In 2005, I was surprised he managed to get a very decent 60 or so seat majority, after the mess of Iraq.
John King His 60 seat majority in 2005 was largely down to the FPTP electoral system. Labour only got 36% of the vote. A lot of the anti-Iraq war Labour vote went to the Lib Dems but the Tories (33%) didn’t do any better than they did in 2001. By contrast in 2010 the Tories got 37% of the vote but did not get a majority at all.
He had an even worst Tory party as a rival .The said Tory party changed itself into a more leftist Blair like party to get elected as labour got more radical and showed decay .
I agree on the income inequality thing. I'd prefer income inequality to be much smaller but improving quality of life for the poor is much more important than hunting down the rich who earn so much.
Income tax on high earners under Blair was a complete turnaround compared to previous Labour governments, who used to bleed dry high earners with a 83% income tax rate.
@@johnking5174 I don't think 'bleed them dry' is a suitable term as even an 83% top tax rate leaves high earners plenty wealthy but yes that is very unreasonable and leads to high inflation and encourages the rich to just leave the country. But to my knowledge tory governments also set very high tax rates pre Thatcher.
@@MichaelJones-wh9cy I have always wondered how the big TV stars of seventies England managed to keep their massive salaries, and avoid a lot of the high tax rates, and fund their lavish lifestyles. People like Morecambe and Wise, Two Ronnies etc were high earners, subjected to high income tax, but always seemed to have a lot of money to splash. Have you any idea? I have been researching this, and read on a few "tricks" used, such as "part cash, part cheque" payment of TV salaries.
@@johnking5174 of all the rich people in the 70s who lived such lavish lifestyles, I suppose the ones who were smart found a way to bypass the system and the ones who weren't probably just went bankrupt
In the Blair & Brown Revolution (2021), Edward Michael Balls said that while the gap between middle-income earners and lower-income earners shrank, the gap between the richest and poorest widened. This would lead to problems for James Gordon Brown in the 2010 Elections.
This was Blair at his zenith..He had an annoyingly brilliant level of eloquence, intelligence and a niche ability to rise above the intellect of those quizzing him... He was at the very peak of his conversational tenacity, had an astutely knowledgable vibe that drew you to his rhetoric and one just has to look left and take away Iraq; then by God the man would without a shimmering doubt be one of if not the UK's greatest politician ever to grace No 10.
This is so frustrating the rich and poor thing and the nhs question .. Paxman loves to go in circles when there’s been a clear answer that anyone with common sense would be able to understand..Blair genuinely answers questions in detail and in logical ways which massively outclasses Paxman in this interview.
Blair is so sharp here! Paxman just wants to spend the whole interview trying to catch him out rather than have a sensible conversation and Blair trumped him every time!! 😆 What a stupid question to imply "rich people should pay even more tax"! Paxman came across really badly here, terrible interviewing!!
That is the point of being a good political interviewer. Jeremy had years of experience of MPs not answering his questions and they wander off on something else.
The grasp of detail is incredible compared to today's politicians. Nobody who has followed could come close.
Did he actually say the words, "the new deal"? Here in the U.S., that certainly grabbed the attention. Paxman's style is prosecutorial here, no doubt.
He wouldn't get 50 yards to a modern politician/globalist etc in the uk
Today , that is .
Boris Johnson could never dream of having the detail Blair has on multiple topics.
Indeed. Blair's knowledge, grasp of detail, intelligence and sharpness was and still is head and shoulders above any other senior British politician. What I'd give to have him as PM as head of another Labour government.
Interesting that Blair refers to 'levelling up' at 10:50
Blair did say he would not raise taxes for Healthcare spending which is funny as he increased National Insurance.
@@TheDanieljhenderson It may not be the same thing as what we know as levelling up.
@@dreamer2260me too! Best PM we had in modern times.
I think Blair handled these interviews a lot better than May does today.
That's because Blair was a much better communicator than Theresa May. He didn't win 3 general elections for nothing. He was however more dangerous. Tony Blair had the ability to sell ice to Eskimos back then.
Why are you saying positive things about Bliar.. hes one guy that need pit down.
@@bmker5469 Because Blair had something that modern labour leaders don't. That being he was a great communicator.
@@madwatermelon1316 kkkkkkkk i like it
@@madwatermelon1316No reverse gear
We didn't realise how good we had it.
Blair comes across as pretty well versed and straightforward on some pressing questions. Easy to see why he won again so handsomely in this election..
Well he didn't really have a viable opposition. William Hague was pathetic and weak, followed by Ian Duncan Smith who could not survive a full parliament before being booted out by his own MPs and then Michael Howard, a ghost from the Thatcher government. He would of course win in 2001. In 2005, I was surprised he managed to get a very decent 60 or so seat majority, after the mess of Iraq.
John King His 60 seat majority in 2005 was largely down to the FPTP electoral system. Labour only got 36% of the vote. A lot of the anti-Iraq war Labour vote went to the Lib Dems but the Tories (33%) didn’t do any better than they did in 2001. By contrast in 2010 the Tories got 37% of the vote but did not get a majority at all.
@@johnking5174 Hague wasn't politically strong, but he tried hard to oppose, really, a master, at his peak.
@@laxeystu8096 Hague was also really young to the point he looked like a school-kid. His rhetoric matured by the end of the decade.
He had an even worst Tory party as a rival .The said Tory party changed itself into a more leftist Blair like party to get elected as labour got more radical and showed decay .
I agree on the income inequality thing. I'd prefer income inequality to be much smaller but improving quality of life for the poor is much more important than hunting down the rich who earn so much.
Income tax on high earners under Blair was a complete turnaround compared to previous Labour governments, who used to bleed dry high earners with a 83% income tax rate.
@@johnking5174 I don't think 'bleed them dry' is a suitable term as even an 83% top tax rate leaves high earners plenty wealthy but yes that is very unreasonable and leads to high inflation and encourages the rich to just leave the country. But to my knowledge tory governments also set very high tax rates pre Thatcher.
@@MichaelJones-wh9cy I have always wondered how the big TV stars of seventies England managed to keep their massive salaries, and avoid a lot of the high tax rates, and fund their lavish lifestyles. People like Morecambe and Wise, Two Ronnies etc were high earners, subjected to high income tax, but always seemed to have a lot of money to splash. Have you any idea? I have been researching this, and read on a few "tricks" used, such as "part cash, part cheque" payment of TV salaries.
@@johnking5174 of all the rich people in the 70s who lived such lavish lifestyles, I suppose the ones who were smart found a way to bypass the system and the ones who weren't probably just went bankrupt
@@johnking5174 plus I reckon they would have received additional payments through donations or something.
In the Blair & Brown Revolution (2021), Edward Michael Balls said that while the gap between middle-income earners and lower-income earners shrank, the gap between the richest and poorest widened. This would lead to problems for James Gordon Brown in the 2010 Elections.
This was Blair at his zenith..He had an annoyingly brilliant level of eloquence, intelligence and a niche ability to rise above the intellect of those quizzing him... He was at the very peak of his conversational tenacity, had an astutely knowledgable vibe that drew you to his rhetoric and one just has to look left and take away Iraq; then by God the man would without a shimmering doubt be one of if not the UK's greatest politician ever to grace No 10.
He did very well here in this grilling against Paxman ,always a very dangerous interviewer. Blair had style & panache & did a lot for the UK.
Thanks for the content, David - whatever people may think of Blair, fascinating to look at the standard of debate here.
Great content on your channel David. Cheers
Great video
This is so frustrating the rich and poor thing and the nhs question .. Paxman loves to go in circles when there’s been a clear answer that anyone with common sense would be able to understand..Blair genuinely answers questions in detail and in logical ways which massively outclasses Paxman in this interview.
Thanks for the upload, a great content of the channel
I love Tony Blair so much.
Blair absolutely outclassed Paxman here, the only one to ever do so.
Is this the one where Jeremy asked him about rich foereign Non Doms and Bliar replied
" If they dont come here Jeremy theyll go somewhere else'
Signed to the Washington Speakers Bureau for £500,000, Blair typically commands up to $250,000
Paxman being obtuse. Any rational person would have understood what that manifesto actually meant.
Paxman not letting Blair off the hook.
07:00 PFI this did not age well
Bring on M People and a fake grin.
Blair was very good, and really capable when thinking on his feet. A pity hubris set in.
Blair is so sharp here! Paxman just wants to spend the whole interview trying to catch him out rather than have a sensible conversation and Blair trumped him every time!! 😆
What a stupid question to imply "rich people should pay even more tax"!
Paxman came across really badly here, terrible interviewing!!
4:30😂😂
Blair really makes Paxman look like the one trick 'gotcha' seeking, argumentative pony that he was here.
Well thats not a credit to society 😢
Would it be a surprise that he raised NIC? Lol.
Swear jeremy interrupts everyone hes interviewing
That is the point of being a good political interviewer. Jeremy had years of experience of MPs not answering his questions and they wander off on something else.
Paxman thinks he’s scoring points with “rebuilding NHS”. What an annoying guy
just before the events of 9/11 , he still seemed almost human?
he still seems human, you're a drama queen
Blair was a proper Tory man
The Labour Left regard Blair a Tory, the Tory Right regard Blair as a Europhile.
@@MrGranfield Tony can never win on this. I see Blair as more centrist Labour.
@@johnking5174 I agree.
Blair isn’t a Tory
Not in the slightest, thank god.