The Observer.

Hi, it's Rachel Sylvester here.

I'm the political editor at The Observer, and you're listening to the slow newscast Extra,

that moment in the week where we here in the newsroom talk about what's on our mind.

And given what's going on in politics right now, it's perhaps no surprise that the Labour Party is occupying our attention a lot right now.

And I've been talking lots with our economics editor, Zaranko about the various approaches within

labour to the economy and what that might mean for policy. And he's here in the studio with

me today. Hi Ben. Hi, Rachel. So you wrote for the Observer this weekend about the competing

visions within Labour for an economic model for the UK. Can you set them out? Say what they are and explain who's backing them?

By chance or by accident or by design, there was a whole flurry of long essays and reports

coming out last week, setting out competing visions for what a Labour government should do

instead of what it's doing currently.

I think there's two of those we should focus on.

One, it came from a group called the Labour Growth Group,

who I think are coded us towards the centre or the right of the party,

where it was a long essay offered by someone called Mark McVittie,

working closely with the group's chair, Chris Curtis.

That really sets out a view for what the government should be doing more to intervene upstream before problems emerge downstream. It's

an argument that the government spends too much time mopping up problems that are created elsewhere

in the economy or in society. So to give a couple of examples, because the energy

market doesn't work well, we end up having to design expensive compensation packages

whenever there's a crisis, because we haven't built enough houses, we end up having to spend

...