Politics

Unhappy Labour MPs aren’t ready to oust Starmer yet

Unhappy Labour MPs aren’t ready to oust Starmer yet9 minutes agoIain Watson,Political correspondentandHenry Zeffman, Jack Fenwick and Joe Pike,Political correspondentsReutersLabour is trailing in the polls and the prime minister’s personal ratings have plumbed the depths.The party is facing losses in forthcoming elections: losing control of Wales, shedding councillors in England, and going into reverse in Scotland.To put the tin lid on it, the prime minister has been on the back foot over his appointment of Lord Mandelson to the job of ambassador to the US, and the subsequent sacking of senior civil servant, Sir Olly Robbins, in a row over security vetting.So the question being asked around Westminster is not ‘should there be a Labour leadership contest?’ The question being asked around Westminster is not’should there be a Labour leadership contest?’ but rather ‘why isn’t such a competition expected on 8th May’ the day after an expected electoral drubbing. One Labour MP, Jonathan Brash has called for Sir Keir’s resignation and to set a timeline for his departure. Some others have agreed with this privately.Nonetheless it is significant that no-one is publicly echoing Brash’s call and the prevailing mood seems to be against an imminent leadership challenge.One long-standing Labour MP has his take: “Keir Starmer is basically dead, isn’t he? There is no rush because people believe that it is inevitable he will not lead us to the next election. Many MPs are reluctant to have a caretaker leader. As one of them said: “We need to be certain that we have a candidate to lead us into the next election.” “They said that it would be disastrous to trust if the Party ‘chopped-and-changed’ and that trying to find a candidate who can reinspire the Party, let alone the voters, has proven elusive. Wes [Streeting] is out of options because of Mandelson – despite the data dump he provided of his text messages. “There is a growing stop Ange’ (Angela Rayner) mood because we do not think she would win an election. “An MP further to the left said that Rayner, the former deputy leader, was “compromised” by her tax affairs and by “taking up lucrative speaking engagements”.Meanwhile, a minister drew a lesson from Labour’s Scottish leader Anas Sarwar’s call for Sir Keir’s resignation in February: it could have fired the starting gun on a leadership contest, but culminated in declarations of loyalty from ministers. “What it showed was that neither Wes nor Angie was ready for it. “I was waiting for a phone call (from Steeting’s team) but it never came,” said they. And a Labour figure with a career that can be traced to the Blair years said people were angry after days of damaging headlines regarding Lord Mandelson. “We will tank at the elections. We are back to where we were just a week earlier. There is no obvious candidate and no easy way to remove a leader. “Beyond The BubbleHowever, MPs are still talking about a potential candidate. One former frontbencher said: “The solution is not in Westminster.” They were talking about Andy Burnham who was prevented from standing for Westminster at the Gorton and Denton By-election earlier in the year. “He’s the kind of person that everyone can live with, except Wes Streeting. “Another possible Burnham supporter seemed more pessimistic. He acknowledged that Greater Manchester Mayor would need to be in a “very secure seat” due to Labour’s polling and that a supporting MP would have to step down. Burnham also needed the approval of Labour’s ruling body, National Executive. The composition of the National Executive could change in his favor this summer. Sir Keir would have been convinced by the analysis of one MP that he had acted correctly – in terms of his political survival – to have vetoed Mayor Burnham’s candidacy. Some MPs were more fatalistic. “If Andy was back (in Westminster), things would have moved sooner,” they said. A minister told us that Starmer was not popular. I think we’re going to lose the next elections. I haven’t heard any serious arguments from any candidate about how to achieve this in such a short time. “Locked In The CabinetSome are looking at those closest to Sir Keir for the defenestration. Just as Conservative PM Margaret Thatcher, was told to leave more than 30 years ago. One MP told us that “lots of cabinet members seem to know he will not lead us into the next election. Some MPs think that ministers are taking a ‘everyone is for themselves’ attitude. One minister said that they were “on manoeuvres”. It has not gone unnoticed how Ed Miliband dissociated himself from the decision of appointing Lord Mandelson as the Washington job. And that Foreign Secretary Yvette cooper and Work and Pensions secretary Pat McFadden both criticized attempts by No10 in order to sound out a ambassadorial role Matthew (now Lord Doyle) Doyle – who is departing head for communications in 2025. They are looking six months ahead and saying they would like to still be in the Cabinet. Someone else’s Cabinet. “An MP who is close to Miliband offered a more straightforward answer. “Ed said: I’m telling you the truth. “There was talk about the PM regaining initiative after the may elections, not only with a new legislation programme in the King’s Speech but also by having a reshuffle. This feels more risky than it did prior to the latest Mandelson disclosures. Disgruntled former ministers can be dangerous. Under the radar, the Prime Minister has been working to shore up his reputation with sceptical members of parliament. There have been receptions held for backbenchers including trips to Chequers – his grace and favour country pile. He is currently meeting with regional groups of lawmakers and internal campaign groups. He met with the Red Wall group on Wednesday to discuss how to extend the industrial strategy of the party to small and medium-sized towns. Some MPs who felt ignored by No 10 now say that they have a proper relationship with them after Morgan McSweeney’s departure as chief of staff. Ex-official says No 10 had a ‘dismissive’ attitude to Mandelson vetting. What we know about Mandelson vetting and clearance. How will the loss of seats make you feel after the elections next month? What will angry ex councillors say to their MPs. Some believe that the emotional impact of election defeats could be too great to bear. “People believe they are prepared, but there’s a chance that things will go crazy this weekend.” One MP said that everything could collapse very quickly. Another said: “The PLP’s like a tinderbox, it might just spark in May.” “But an MP told me about the fears of a PM-loyal colleague: “They told me, “I hope the PLP does not do anything rash”. “I said that there was no chance the PLP would ever do anything rash. Sign up for our Politics Essential Newsletter to read top political analyses, gain insight from all over the UK and keep up to date with the biggest moments. It will be delivered to your inbox each weekday.Angela RaynerKeir StarmerWes StreetingLabour PartyAndy Burham

Politics

PM’s ex-chief of staff to give evidence on Mandelson vetting

Cat Little, the top civil servant in the Cabinet Office, is scheduled to appear before the committee at 9:30 BST on Thursday. Committee chair Dame Emily Thornberry said that the Foreign Office Chief Property and Security officer Ian Collard, and former Foreign Office Top Civil Servant Sir Philip Barton, have also been asked for evidence. Little told Sir Keir starmer last week that the UK Security and Vetting team raised concerns about Lord Mandelson but the Foreign Office still granted him a security clearance. Sir Olly was effectively fired by the prime minister, who expressed anger that the Foreign Office hadn’t told him that Mandelson had failed security vetting. Sir Olly gave his version of the events to the Foreign Affairs Committee, on Tuesday. He said that he hadn’t seen UKSV documents, but that he had been told, in an oral presentation, that Lord Mandelson’s case was “borderline” and that the risks could be managed. He said that he was not allowed to share details of the vetting with the prime minister, but only his final decision. This was due to civil service guidelines. Sir Olly said that his department was under “pressure” to complete the process of clearing Lord Mandelson for his new role in Washington. Lord Mandelson, who had been appointed to the position seven months earlier, was fired due to his friendship with convicted sexual offender Jeffrey Epstein. Starmer admits that No 10 asked about the job for Matthew Doyle. Key evidence from a sacked official at the heart of Mandelson vetting dispute. What we know about Mandelson vetting and clearance. Sir Keir defended his actions during Prime Minister’s Question, saying that if he had been informed by the Foreign Office about the vetting concerns, “Mandelson wouldn’t have been committed to the post.” Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, said that Sir Olly was “sacked because of the prime minister’s failures” and his own MPs knew that this was not fair. Keir Starmer

Politics

Starmer admits No 10 asked about job for aide Matthew Doyle

Star When The Lord ” Labour She ” She ” Wrong, wrong, wrong. He The It

Politics

Starmer sends ‘chill’ through civil service, its union boss says

Star Dave He ” The The There

Politics

No 10 had ‘dismissive attitude’ to Mandelson vetting, says ex-official

The The ” ” Sir Sir ” ” Sir ” ” ” ” ” No It

Politics

Key evidence from sacked official at heart of Mandelson vetting row

Key points from sacked official in Mandelson vetting disputeJust nowKate WhannelPolitical ReporterPA MediaSir Olly, the former top civil service at the Foreign Office is giving evidence to the MPs on foreign affairs committee about the role he played in vetting the peer security clearance for the role of the UK’s Ambassador to the US. Sir Olly Robbins, the former top civil servant at the Foreign Office, is giving evidence to MPs on the foreign affairs committee about his role in vetting Lord Mandelson to be the UK’s ambassador to the US. This comes after he was effectively sacked by his department last week when it was revealed that his department had granted peer security clearance for this role in January 2025 against the recommendation of the security officials who vetted the person. No 10 had a “dismissive” approach to vetting. In a letter published at the same time as his oral testimony, Sir Olly stated that Lord Mandelson’s nomination had already been announced by the US when he took up the role in the Foreign Office. He also noted that Lord Mandelson was already granted access to the Foreign Office and given a “highly classified briefing, on a case-bycase basis”. He said that these factors “resulted” in a dismissive attitude from Downing Street towards developed vetting – the process necessary to obtain security clearance. Downing Street is under ‘constant pressure’ Sir Olly said that Downing Street had a “strong expectation”, that Lord Mandelson should “be in America and in his post as soon as humanly possible”. He said that his office was “under constant pressure” to complete the vetting. He said later that “I think the department felt pressured, but we were proud that we hadn’t bowed to this pressure.” “Mandelson’s concerns did not pertain to Epstein. In his letter, he said that he had never seen the documentation of UK Security Vetting, the government’s internal vetting unit. It contained their vetting evaluation of Lord Mandelson. He said that, instead, he received an oral briefing during which he learned that the vetting agency regarded Mandelson as a “borderline” case and that they “were leaning towards recommending clearance be denied”. He said UKSV acknowledged the Foreign Office may “want to grant clearance with appropriate risk management”. “The risks were not related to Jeffrey Epstein,” said he. Sir Olly refused to answer questions from Labour MP Emily Thornberry who chairs the committee. Sir Olly said that blocking Mandelson would have created problems with the US. He advised the government to conduct Lord Mandelson’s background check before announcing his appointment. He said that former US President Joe Biden agreed to the appointment near the end of his tenure in office. He added that if the nomination changed after this point, the incoming government would have commented publicly on it and it could have caused a problem in the relationship. Starmer’s Mandelson Statement: Key Points Officials withheld Mandelson’s vetting results from me, Starmer claims.Sign up for the Politics Essential newsletter and read top political analyses, gain insight across the UK, and stay up-to-date with the big moments. It will be delivered to your inbox each weekday.Keir Starmer