Dave Lee Travis was my "lifeline" says, Aung San Suu Kyi

The former BBC radio DJ was a "lifeline" for the Burmese pro-democracy campaigner when she was under

The Burmese pro-democracy campaigner and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi spent the best part of two decades under house arrest. From 1989 until her full release in 2010, Suu Kyi was in and out of detention, spending years at a time locked up. How did she get through this? The knowledge that thousands of people across the world wished her well may have provided some solace. Suu Kyi also meditated every day, according to this New Statesman profile from 2010. The secret to her survival, however, emerged today in an interview with the Radio Times. This man was her "lifeline", who made her "world much more complete". Who was he?

Dave Lee Travis.

Yes, the beardy DJ who presented A Jolly Good Show on the BBC World Service from 1981 until 2001 played a surprising role in keeping Suu Kyi sane in her years of imprisonment. How did Lee Travis react to this news? Was he humbled by the knowledge that he played a small part in Suu Kyi's fight to bring democracy to Burma? Not really. In a blaze of modesty, Lee Travis said that he was "touched" but "not surprised" she remembered his show.

On a more serious note, it does emphasise the importance of the BBC World Service. As Suu Kyi points out, the World Service is the "only line to the outside world" for many. Admittedly, Suu Kyi was talking more about the World Service's news and culture coverage in general, rather than Dave Lee Travis's slot. Even so, perhaps with this revelation, the true role of BBC DJs as freedom fighters will emerge.

Presumably, when Ai Weiwei is eventually released in 20 years time, he will stumble into a press conference -- greyer, with a longer beard -- and begin: "There is one person that I could not have survived without in this bleak period. He was the light in my darkness; he brought dull chart music to my soul. For all that he has given me, I want to say thank you, Vernon Kay."

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.