New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
I'll hold my hands up; I recall posting that I thought appointing Mandelson might turn out to be a good idea, if only because, apparently, Trump quite liked him (?saw a kindred soul in him) and that might well have turned in UK's interests.
What I didn't realise, and to be fair none of us knew at the time, were the shenanigans going on around the appointment. It would, I suggest, be helpful if Sir K were to a) apologise (again) for the appointment and b) apologise for the said shenanigans and, I suggest, offer Robbins his (or a similar) job. Assuming, of course, he didn't have to sack someone else to do so.
Sir Keir was being questioned on whether it was a good idea to have Mandelson hanging around advising him back in 2023! He knew all the downsides, he just wanted to use Mandy's cunning for his own ends. All we have now is his usual trick of lawyerly pernickety-ness and sleight of hand to distract/bore us over the minutiae of process as a way out of trouble on a technicality
I didn't realise/remember about your first sentence. I've no doubt Mandelson is as dodgy as a nine-bob note (showing my age).
As I've said, his best bet now is to come clean, apologise and, so far as individuals are concerned, make amends. If possible.
Anthony Seldon thinks Starmer should bring back even more figures from the Blair era "to make the progressive dream happen", with Blair himself as foregin secretary. It's pure nostalgia.
62% of Britons see the Labour government as at least as sleazy and disreputable as the previous Conservative government
More sleazy: 32% About as sleazy: 30% Less sleazy: 24%
That is pretty damning poll findings for Keir Starmer's Labour Government considering they have been in power for less than two years when compared to the Conservative party who were in Office for fourteen years before they lost the last GE.
Shows how badly engaged the British public is
Last Con Govts Johnson £800k loan facility £bns PPE contracts to donors / friends (Mone, Meller, Marks etc)
Latest party leader net favourability ratings, April 2026
Kemi Badenoch: -21 Nigel Farage: -38 Keir Starmer: -45
Ed Davey: -3 (37% DK) Zack Polanski: -9 (39% DK)
Farage rapidly approaching Starmer levels of hatred.
New Labour leader therefore might do rather well at least for a day.
Farage’s USP was as an outsider damaging the cosy consensus. I don’t think the new image of a statesman with a plan suits him. It’s like Jack Grealish under Pep, orcWayne’s World under Noah van der Hoff
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
Latest party leader net favourability ratings, April 2026
Kemi Badenoch: -21 Nigel Farage: -38 Keir Starmer: -45
Ed Davey: -3 (37% DK) Zack Polanski: -9 (39% DK)
Farage rapidly approaching Starmer levels of hatred.
New Labour leader therefore might do rather well at least for a day.
Farage’s USP was as an outsider damaging the cosy consensus. I don’t think the new image of a statesman with a plan suits him. It’s like Jack Grealish under Pep, orcWayne’s World under Noah van der Hoff
He’s very marmite.
My in-laws should certainly lean to Reform but neither would vote Reform as they dislike Farage. He’s smarmy is what they said yesterday.
These are mostly easily preventable deaths, due to pre-eclampsia or blood clots. There have been a number of scandals due to poor care in particular maternity units, but it's clear that there's a systemic problem where things are going very wrong a lot of the time in a lot of places.
It's notable that an earlier government, about a decade ago, had a target to have maternal deaths, and instead they've gone up. I don't raise this as a party political point, but I'm order to say that this is an issue that has had political attention, and yet it has still deteriorated.
So there's a problem with the political system failing, as well as in the maternity units themselves.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
It is indeed an almighty mess
Are we approaching the moment where David Davis stands up in Parliament and exclaims "for the love of God, go man!"? I think we are.
Pointless by election in Goole and Pocklington to hammer home his chagrin
It was a different era. Haltemprice and Howdens as I recall. Now would be a good time to re-pull that stunt. Certainly more jeopardy.
"Wriggle room if the killings did not in fact happen."
Those are the words of Keir Starmer's Attorney General, sent whilst dragging British troops through the courts.
The troops were innocent. Keir Starmer's judgement is not.
Some may recall the prosecution of an armed police officer for shooting a man who was driving a car at him. The jury acquitted.
Some messages were leaked, where it became clear that the prosecution was about trying to get an armed police officer convicted - some in the CPS saw this as an important objective to put “the manners” on the armed police.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
It is indeed an almighty mess
Are we approaching the moment where David Davis stands up in Parliament and exclaims "for the love of God, go man!"? I think we are.
Pointless by election in Goole and Pocklington to hammer home his chagrin
It was a different era. Haltemprice and Howdens as I recall. Now would be a good time to re-pull that stunt. Certainly more jeopardy.
If hes thinking of retiring it would assist with bringing it forward
Latest party leader net favourability ratings, April 2026
Kemi Badenoch: -21 Nigel Farage: -38 Keir Starmer: -45
Ed Davey: -3 (37% DK) Zack Polanski: -9 (39% DK)
Farage rapidly approaching Starmer levels of hatred.
New Labour leader therefore might do rather well at least for a day.
Farage’s USP was as an outsider damaging the cosy consensus. I don’t think the new image of a statesman with a plan suits him. It’s like Jack Grealish under Pep, orcWayne’s World under Noah van der Hoff
He’s very marmite.
My in-laws should certainly lean to Reform but neither would vote Reform as they dislike Farage. He’s smarmy is what they said yesterday.
One of my sons, when he worked in the City, many years ago, used to work close to him. Couldn't stand him then and see no reason to change his mind.
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
As if we didn’t already know all of these ‘prediction’ markets are rigged in favour of insiders and scammers.
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
As if we didn’t already know all of these ‘prediction’ markets are rigged in favour of insiders and scammers.
Yes, but this one isn't in the Trump crime family circle.
Latest party leader net favourability ratings, April 2026
Kemi Badenoch: -21 Nigel Farage: -38 Keir Starmer: -45
Ed Davey: -3 (37% DK) Zack Polanski: -9 (39% DK)
Farage rapidly approaching Starmer levels of hatred.
New Labour leader therefore might do rather well at least for a day.
Farage’s USP was as an outsider damaging the cosy consensus. I don’t think the new image of a statesman with a plan suits him. It’s like Jack Grealish under Pep, orcWayne’s World under Noah van der Hoff
Having lots of people dislike you doesn't necessarily stop you being elected, if 30%+ like you - if someone who wouldn't vote for you dislikes you, so what? The difference is if you're *so* disliked that people rally behind the nearest challenger. That's the risk for insurgent parties - a problem for both Greens and Reform, but IMO more so for Reform at the moment.
The Civil Service talent for obfuscation appears undiminished. The one thing I hoped for from this whole affair was that some light might be shed on the internal workings of the FO and Cabinet Office, but this just seems to be pure Yes Minister territory.
(Guardian) Cat Little’s comment that Robbins refused to give her access to Mandelson’s vetting report, and the Foreign Office’s note of its decision to grant clearance, is confusing given two other remarks.
The first is that, in the end, she managed to get a copy of the UKSV summary directly from UKSV, which she is responsible for overseeing. So why did she need to go to the Foreign Office for this, though she would have needed the department to provide the note of its decision to grant clearance. We have learned this was an email from Ian Collard, the department’s head of security. Collard has been called to give evidence to the committee.
The second is Little has said that in September 2025, after Mandelson was removed from post, it was the Foreign Office security team that came to the Cabinet Office to ask to see a “number of documents relating to the vetting file”.
It is unclear why both departments appear to have asked each other for the UKSV documentation...
..Little says she delayed telling PM about Mandelson vetting recommendation because she wanted legal advice first Little said she saw the UKSV report on Mandelson on 25 March.
She said she dicussed it with the cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, shortly afterwards. But they did not tell the PM until 14 April.
Asked why it took so long to inform him, she replied: "I immediately sought legal … advice, because this is such an unusual thing for a government official to do, to handle that sort of security information. I believe I have a responsibility to handle that sensitive information within the framework of both the law and the guidance that I’m subject to, and I did not feel that I could share that information until I understood the consequences and the authority that I had..."
Asked if she thought there would be a record of the meeting where Robbins and the Foreign Office head of security agreed that Mandelson’s vetting should be approved, Little replied: "Civil servants are great administrators. We are famous for our record keeping, and the civil service code requires us, to take accurate notes, and to handle information within the legal framework."
As an alternative to answering yes or no, that final reply takes some beating, as it is capable of almost any interpretation.
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
As if we didn’t already know all of these ‘prediction’ markets are rigged in favour of insiders and scammers.
Is Polymarket rigged? I haven't seen evidence of this. There were some slightly shady times they issued "clarifications" about the meaning of ongoing markets but they were mostly about trivialities and you could make an argument for them. I don't think they're any worse about this than Betfair.
I'd be a little bit worried about their presidential markets where there may be pressure to support whatever Trump says but as far as I can tell they've operated fairly to date.
To there are of course particular markets where insiders have the advantage and you shouldn't participate in those but that's not really Polymarket's fault.
62% of Britons see the Labour government as at least as sleazy and disreputable as the previous Conservative government
More sleazy: 32% About as sleazy: 30% Less sleazy: 24%
That is pretty damning poll findings for Keir Starmer's Labour Government considering they have been in power for less than two years when compared to the Conservative party who were in Office for fourteen years before they lost the last GE.
Shows how badly engaged the British public is
Last Con Govts Johnson £800k loan facility £bns PPE contracts to donors / friends (Mone, Meller, Marks etc)
PWC, Fujitsu, KPMG, Capita etc probably "donate" to both parties, with in kind assistance to embed their people
Labour were pushing exactly the same kind of PPE suppliers at the time. The real fault lies with the seeming inability to go after those who have provided substandard PPE. This is surely standard in business - if a supplier delivers faulty goods, they don't get paid.
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
As if we didn’t already know all of these ‘prediction’ markets are rigged in favour of insiders and scammers.
I'm amazed the climate skeptics aren't all over this one! They have spent decades pouring over every single weather station looking for errors and external factors (such as airplane jet exhausts for ones near runways) etc.
The Civil Service talent for obfuscation appears undiminished. The one thing I hoped for from this whole affair was that some light might be shed on the internal workings of the FO and Cabinet Office, but this just seems to be pure Yes Minister territory.
(Guardian) Cat Little’s comment that Robbins refused to give her access to Mandelson’s vetting report, and the Foreign Office’s note of its decision to grant clearance, is confusing given two other remarks.
The first is that, in the end, she managed to get a copy of the UKSV summary directly from UKSV, which she is responsible for overseeing. So why did she need to go to the Foreign Office for this, though she would have needed the department to provide the note of its decision to grant clearance. We have learned this was an email from Ian Collard, the department’s head of security. Collard has been called to give evidence to the committee.
The second is Little has said that in September 2025, after Mandelson was removed from post, it was the Foreign Office security team that came to the Cabinet Office to ask to see a “number of documents relating to the vetting file”.
It is unclear why both departments appear to have asked each other for the UKSV documentation...
..Little says she delayed telling PM about Mandelson vetting recommendation because she wanted legal advice first Little said she saw the UKSV report on Mandelson on 25 March.
She said she dicussed it with the cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, shortly afterwards. But they did not tell the PM until 14 April.
Asked why it took so long to inform him, she replied: "I immediately sought legal … advice, because this is such an unusual thing for a government official to do, to handle that sort of security information. I believe I have a responsibility to handle that sensitive information within the framework of both the law and the guidance that I’m subject to, and I did not feel that I could share that information until I understood the consequences and the authority that I had..."
Asked if she thought there would be a record of the meeting where Robbins and the Foreign Office head of security agreed that Mandelson’s vetting should be approved, Little replied: "Civil servants are great administrators. We are famous for our record keeping, and the civil service code requires us, to take accurate notes, and to handle information within the legal framework."
As an alternative to answering yes or no, that final reply takes some beating, as it is capable of almost any interpretation.
"Go not to the Elves for counsel, for they will say both no and yes”
The issue with Starmer and Labour is not so much the sleaze but the lack of judgment Starmer has displayed, which has led to the sleaze but which has also led to very poor policy and political decisions.
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
As if we didn’t already know all of these ‘prediction’ markets are rigged in favour of insiders and scammers.
Is Polymarket rigged? I haven't seen evidence of this. There were some slightly shady times they issued "clarifications" about the meaning of ongoing markets but they were mostly about trivialities and you could make an argument for them. I don't think they're any worse about this than Betfair.
I'd be a little bit worried about their presidential markets where there may be pressure to support whatever Trump says but as far as I can tell they've operated fairly to date.
To there are of course particular markets where insiders have the advantage and you shouldn't participate in those but that's not really Polymarket's fault.
It’s the sheer number of markets they offer which are massive red flags for insider information, and market manipulation that would be illegal if done on stock markets.
Speculating on dates of a war, or negotiations to end it, for example, are clear examples.
There were a group of people arrested for betting on the date of the general election in the UK, when they had been in a meeting with PM Sunak when this was discussed.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
62% of Britons see the Labour government as at least as sleazy and disreputable as the previous Conservative government
More sleazy: 32% About as sleazy: 30% Less sleazy: 24%
That is pretty damning poll findings for Keir Starmer's Labour Government considering they have been in power for less than two years when compared to the Conservative party who were in Office for fourteen years before they lost the last GE.
Shows how badly engaged the British public is
Last Con Govts Johnson £800k loan facility £bns PPE contracts to donors / friends (Mone, Meller, Marks etc)
PWC, Fujitsu, KPMG, Capita etc probably "donate" to both parties, with in kind assistance to embed their people
Labour were pushing exactly the same kind of PPE suppliers at the time. The real fault lies with the seeming inability to go after those who have provided substandard PPE. This is surely standard in business - if a supplier delivers faulty goods, they don't get paid.
Correct. They either don’t get paid or replace to the correct spec
So begs the question did they deliver to the spec they were given ?
I’ve been in supply chain many years and, in all the businesses and industries I’ve worked in, of the products aren’t to spec the supplier doesn’t get paid.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
Ref UK will like him, as will cricket munchkins - the patron Saint of Boundaries.
St Botolph-without-Bishopsgate in the City of London has one of the great churchyards of the City, which contains an ex-Livery Hall as the church hall with Coade Stone statues, a tennis court you can hire, and a Victorian turkish bath. It is also one of the larger City Parks.
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
62% of Britons see the Labour government as at least as sleazy and disreputable as the previous Conservative government
More sleazy: 32% About as sleazy: 30% Less sleazy: 24%
That is pretty damning poll findings for Keir Starmer's Labour Government considering they have been in power for less than two years when compared to the Conservative party who were in Office for fourteen years before they lost the last GE.
Shows how badly engaged the British public is
Last Con Govts Johnson £800k loan facility £bns PPE contracts to donors / friends (Mone, Meller, Marks etc)
PWC, Fujitsu, KPMG, Capita etc probably "donate" to both parties, with in kind assistance to embed their people
Labour were pushing exactly the same kind of PPE suppliers at the time. The real fault lies with the seeming inability to go after those who have provided substandard PPE. This is surely standard in business - if a supplier delivers faulty goods, they don't get paid.
I'd also add that Labour sleaze goes rather further than the bits and bobs highlighted by Doperman - the stench around Peter Mandelson being only the most obvious example
I don’t think Goodwin etc are correct about this. For me a landlord should be able to advertise for specific tenants. Of course there would be uproar from the left if it were ‘white’ or ‘Christian’ instead of Muslim, but so what? They aren’t the left. I think there are far too many Muslims in the UK, but fair enough if people want to stick to their own, that’s human nature. It shows that multiculturalism doesn’t really work, but it never was going to.
This is outrageous. Landlords are illegally advertising for “Muslim only” tenants across London and the south-east, The Telegraph has found.
The property listings feature phrases such as “only for Muslims”, “for 2 Muslim boys or 2 Muslim girls” and “Muslims preferred”.
This is illegal, is unBritish, and should be shut down immediately.
Can you imagine the total uproar in Westminster & the BBC if landlords were advertising for “whites only” or “Christians only”?!
Here’s a question for you old bean: what exactly is your issue with Muslims?
Don’t bother with the ‘old bean’ nonsense please
I think it is a problem for a country to have competing groups for supremacy, and having so many of a new group that doesn’t really accept the traditional laws or customs of the land is a recipe for disaster. I don’t have an issue with anyone personally on the basis of their religion or colour, I get on with most people and am interested in different cultures, I just think that on a nationwide level it makes for a lot of unnecessary aggravation to have introduced Islam en masse to what was/is a Christian country
Do you object to Hindus, Sikhs and Jews?
Why would I?
Because they have similarly introduced non-Christian beliefs and cultures to the country.
I think the Hindu, Sikh and Jewish culture introduced is smaller in number and not as fundamental as that of Islam. I’ve never looked but I’d guess the level of inter marriage between Christian’s/atheists and Muslims is lower than that between the other religions you mention. Maybe not. I’ll look now
AI says
Muslim marrying Christian/no religion is 2-4% Sikh is 3-5% Hindi 8-10% Jewish 30-40%
Given that there are 4m Muslims, 1m Hindus, 500k Sikhs and 250k Jews in the UK, that seems to back up my instinct; there are millions of Muslims who don’t seem to want to mix with what was considered the native population, compared with a much smaller number both in real terms and as a percentage of the other religions mentioned. Throw in 7/7, Lee Rigby, Westminster & London Bridge, Manchester Arena, the PBunmentionable, and I say, with no offence to the nice Muslims, the sixties, nurses, dentists and so on that on balance I think it was a bad move to have so many here, even if on a one to one level I consider them no differently to anyone else
It seems to me that this discussion needs handling with care. I was brought up in a strongly Jewish part of London, and when young it never crossed my mind that in time anti-Semitism would rise up again as it has. This has happened through multiple factors including the presence of millions of Islamic people, the rise of the far right, the continuing antisemitism of the far left and Israel's damaging and catastrophic policies and actions.
Isam wants to talk about 'too many'. I want to tell you about the little Islamic girl who was bridesmaid to my daughter at her very Christian and churchy wedding and think about what this discussion does to her as she grows up and how it should be conducted.
There was a time when really nice decent people thought there were too many Jewish people in central Europe.
The little girl you mention is an example of someone who may assimilate, but the evidence is that the majority don’t want to. And why would they? I don’t blame them, but it doesn’t make for a happier, more united country than the one they or their parents/grandparents arrived in
I think that assimilation is welcome and happens over time regardless of the wishes of older generations. It's possible to force the pace, as the Danish government is trying to do (immigration rules require that you live in an area which don't have a majority of people like you) - I'm not sure it's necessary. Obviously people willing to commit violent acts for their faith are unwelcome, but a very small minority who can be stamped on to general approval. If people in part of London have different tastes in food or worship or whatever, should we really care that much?
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
I'll hold my hands up; I recall posting that I thought appointing Mandelson might turn out to be a good idea, if only because, apparently, Trump quite liked him (?saw a kindred soul in him) and that might well have turned in UK's interests.
What I didn't realise, and to be fair none of us knew at the time, were the shenanigans going on around the appointment. It would, I suggest, be helpful if Sir K were to a) apologise (again) for the appointment and b) apologise for the said shenanigans and, I suggest, offer Robbins his (or a similar) job. Assuming, of course, he didn't have to sack someone else to do so.
Sir Keir was being questioned on whether it was a good idea to have Mandelson hanging around advising him back in 2023! He knew all the downsides, he just wanted to use Mandy's cunning for his own ends. All we have now is his usual trick of lawyerly pernickety-ness and sleight of hand to distract/bore us over the minutiae of process as a way out of trouble on a technicality
I didn't realise/remember about your first sentence. I've no doubt Mandelson is as dodgy as a nine-bob note (showing my age).
As I've said, his best bet now is to come clean, apologise and, so far as individuals are concerned, make amends. If possible.
Yes. I think Starmer should have toughed it out, said - yes, I knew there were risks but also PM offered unique ability in dealing with White House etc... in the end more was uncovered and he became too big a risk and had to go. My judgement was that it was a balance, I'm sorry I got the balance wrong, move on.
The issue with Starmer and Labour is not so much the sleaze but the lack of judgment Starmer has displayed, which has led to the sleaze but which has also led to very poor policy and political decisions.
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
I can't help but think if he had been a bright thinking person he would have joined a private practice. He has so many flaws. If it hadn't been for the Public School he would have ended up in retail I guess, perhaps ever a store manager, but that would have been pushing his abilities.
When a disaster happens it is seen as a coming together of events. Surely it is only because or a coming together of events that Starmer ever got to uni and so became the menace he has undeniably been.
The most striking thing for me this week was the look of absolute bafflement on his face in the Commons when people were unimpressed and not satisfied by his grandeloquent statements. How could Kemi not accept and be delighted to accept his wonderful carefully crafted responses which showed that as always he was right all along.
More worryingly and Cyclefree seems to confirm this, in his previous life he could spout this balls and be thought a great man.
This whole Robbins business is a stinky red herring served up by Number 10. @keirstarmer appointed Mandelson, staff and civil servants implemented it, they are not to blame.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
Ref UK will like him, as will cricket munchkins - the patron Saint of Boundaries.
St Botolph-without-Bishopsgate in the City of London has one of the great churchyards of the City, which contains an ex-Livery Hall as the church hall with Coade Stone statues, a tennis court you can hire, and a Victorian turkish bath. It is also one of the larger City Parks.
I didn't know he was actually patron saint of boundaries. I was aware of all the London churches being by gates, but just assumed it was a London thing. And yes have often been in the Bishopsgate gardens and even sang in the church once many years ago at a very posh wedding!
Edity - I should really have known this too as a one time geographer!
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
I'd go for Bede (though I'm not sure he's officially a saint ?).
The Civil Service talent for obfuscation appears undiminished. The one thing I hoped for from this whole affair was that some light might be shed on the internal workings of the FO and Cabinet Office, but this just seems to be pure Yes Minister territory.
(Guardian) Cat Little’s comment that Robbins refused to give her access to Mandelson’s vetting report, and the Foreign Office’s note of its decision to grant clearance, is confusing given two other remarks.
The first is that, in the end, she managed to get a copy of the UKSV summary directly from UKSV, which she is responsible for overseeing. So why did she need to go to the Foreign Office for this, though she would have needed the department to provide the note of its decision to grant clearance. We have learned this was an email from Ian Collard, the department’s head of security. Collard has been called to give evidence to the committee.
The second is Little has said that in September 2025, after Mandelson was removed from post, it was the Foreign Office security team that came to the Cabinet Office to ask to see a “number of documents relating to the vetting file”.
It is unclear why both departments appear to have asked each other for the UKSV documentation...
..Little says she delayed telling PM about Mandelson vetting recommendation because she wanted legal advice first Little said she saw the UKSV report on Mandelson on 25 March.
She said she dicussed it with the cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, shortly afterwards. But they did not tell the PM until 14 April.
Asked why it took so long to inform him, she replied: "I immediately sought legal … advice, because this is such an unusual thing for a government official to do, to handle that sort of security information. I believe I have a responsibility to handle that sensitive information within the framework of both the law and the guidance that I’m subject to, and I did not feel that I could share that information until I understood the consequences and the authority that I had..."
Asked if she thought there would be a record of the meeting where Robbins and the Foreign Office head of security agreed that Mandelson’s vetting should be approved, Little replied: "Civil servants are great administrators. We are famous for our record keeping, and the civil service code requires us, to take accurate notes, and to handle information within the legal framework."
As an alternative to answering yes or no, that final reply takes some beating, as it is capable of almost any interpretation.
That answer is a yes, or "yes, unless they completely ignored the rules". So there should be a note of the meeting.
The reason for asking FCDO for UKSV's report is clearly that she needed documents off both, and as the FCDO had the UK's report she could just ask one person for both documents. It appears the FCDO had it on a confidential basis (or thought they did), which seems to surprise her.
Little sought legal advice because she clearly thought a civil servant was about to get scapegoated for a political f-ck up. Clearly someone was in the sh-t. As it turns out was Robbins, although I don't think he is blameless.
Given the drama over Mandelson and the fact that he watched as Starmer kept being asked constant questions about the issue Robbins should have done what Little did .
Get legal advice to see whether you can share some details with the PM .
Not bothering to find out was a bad decision and he already said in exceptional circumstances you can share info .
How much more exceptional did it need to be ?
The media seem to have avoided this in their clamour to attack Starmer and paint Robbins as a martyr .
Black children across England and Wales are almost eight times more likely to be strip-searched by police than their white peers according to a new report by the Children's Commissioner.
Nearly half of all searches resulted in no further action.
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
It's the scale of it that boggles my mind. The sheer number and turnover (in terms of shops opening/closing) of the types of mini marts, non functional takeaways and so forth. If I think of my area, there must be a good 3 figures of shops fitting that description, for around 200k of population, all with those one or two recognisable styles of shop fitting.
As an aside barbers, I think, are a more mixed picture. There is a passage in Notes from a Small Island where Bryson takes a slow bus from Manchester to Wigan, iirc, and notes the hairdressers on pretty much every street. The baseline of legitimate business needed in this sector is quite high.
Exactly how much dirty money is there? I know it is lucrative but, good grief. Is a lot of this actually take over of our retail property estates by clean money - foreign investment firms and the like, who don't mind what then goes on underneath that to pay the returns?
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
I'd go for Bede (though I'm not sure he's officially a saint ?).
A good choice, he was much more than just a local Northumbrian saint. Also one I support as an ex Durham man!
Since everyone is filled with Georgian fervour and/or whining about any mention of his ethnicity, I feel the tale of Dippy the Mexican axolotl found in a Welsh river (Wales is just part of greater England int it?) is resonant. It’s apparently the size of a small cat which I’m almost certain was the size of any dragon that St George encountered.
The issue with Starmer and Labour is not so much the sleaze but the lack of judgment Starmer has displayed, which has led to the sleaze but which has also led to very poor policy and political decisions.
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
I can't help but think if he had been a bright thinking person he would have joined a private practice. He has so many flaws. If it hadn't been for the Public School he would have ended up in retail I guess, perhaps ever a store manager, but that would have been pushing his abilities.
When a disaster happens it is seen as a coming together of events. Surely it is only because or a coming together of events that Starmer ever got to uni and so became the menace he has undeniably been.
The most striking thing for me this week was the look of absolute bafflement on his face in the Commons when people were unimpressed and not satisfied by his grandeloquent statements. How could Kemi not accept and be delighted to accept his wonderful carefully crafted responses which showed that as always he was right all along.
More worryingly and Cyclefree seems to confirm this, in his previous life he could spout this balls and be thought a great man.
What Public School? Sir Keir passed the 11+ and went to the local grammar.
Id say quite an eye raising new MRP poll - Tories pushing Ref for largest party
A Ref-Con coalition government would be an interesting proposition because you could see both wings of it maintaining their electoral base, so it could conceivably get reelected.
Labour and Tories both up to around 30% by GE2029 I reckon.
Things like UK ICE, I don’t think this is where the UK public want to go (Reform). I also don’t think we want to make Jews feel like they’re imagining what is happening or that Russia is actually not so bad (Greens).
Labour have to lance the boil. And Badenoch needs to keep doing basically what she’s been doing. Just needs to calm down a bit.
The issue with Starmer and Labour is not so much the sleaze but the lack of judgment Starmer has displayed, which has led to the sleaze but which has also led to very poor policy and political decisions.
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
I can't help but think if he had been a bright thinking person he would have joined a private practice. He has so many flaws. If it hadn't been for the Public School he would have ended up in retail I guess, perhaps ever a store manager, but that would have been pushing his abilities.
When a disaster happens it is seen as a coming together of events. Surely it is only because or a coming together of events that Starmer ever got to uni and so became the menace he has undeniably been.
The most striking thing for me this week was the look of absolute bafflement on his face in the Commons when people were unimpressed and not satisfied by his grandeloquent statements. How could Kemi not accept and be delighted to accept his wonderful carefully crafted responses which showed that as always he was right all along.
More worryingly and Cyclefree seems to confirm this, in his previous life he could spout this balls and be thought a great man.
What Public School? Sir Keir passed the 11+ and went to the local grammar.
Although @A_View_From_Cumbria5 makes a valid general point about public school education allowing numpties to get into positions of power and influence way beyond their abilities.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
I'd go for Bede (though I'm not sure he's officially a saint ?).
I think he is, the Catholic Church made him a Doctor of the Church in 1899 and I think that included formal canonisation
The Patron saint of Palestine, which we imported via returning Crusaders.
LOL
The St George was a Palestinian ‘hot take’
BTW as sorry I am for your teams relegation, especially as you seem a decent guy, I did put a fiver on them at 5/4 to go down after a post lf yours here.
I didn't say that St George was a Palestinian, merely that he is the Patron Saint of Palestine (as well as a number of other places, including Moscow).
But it was returning Crusader Knights that popularised St George in England, and paradoxically the lack of a local shrine was part of the reason, other rivals being particularly associated with regions of England.
And Georgia - their flag is a rip off of England's 😁
The issue with Starmer and Labour is not so much the sleaze but the lack of judgment Starmer has displayed, which has led to the sleaze but which has also led to very poor policy and political decisions.
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
I can't help but think if he had been a bright thinking person he would have joined a private practice. He has so many flaws. If it hadn't been for the Public School he would have ended up in retail I guess, perhaps ever a store manager, but that would have been pushing his abilities.
When a disaster happens it is seen as a coming together of events. Surely it is only because or a coming together of events that Starmer ever got to uni and so became the menace he has undeniably been.
The most striking thing for me this week was the look of absolute bafflement on his face in the Commons when people were unimpressed and not satisfied by his grandeloquent statements. How could Kemi not accept and be delighted to accept his wonderful carefully crafted responses which showed that as always he was right all along.
More worryingly and Cyclefree seems to confirm this, in his previous life he could spout this balls and be thought a great man.
What Public School? Sir Keir passed the 11+ and went to the local grammar.
He might have turned out ok if he had been at a Public School, less peevish and fewer chips on his shoulder.
Labour and Tories both up to around 30% by GE2029 I reckon.
Things like UK ICE, I don’t think this is where the UK public want to go (Reform). I also don’t think we want to make Jews feel like they’re imagining what is happening or that Russia is actually not so bad (Greens).
Labour have to lance the boil. And Badenoch needs to keep doing basically what she’s been doing. Just needs to calm down a bit.
UK ICE is very New Labour. They would have had David Blunkett or John Reid joining them on immigration enforcement raids.
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
It's the scale of it that boggles my mind. The sheer number and turnover (in terms of shops opening/closing) of the types of mini marts, non functional takeaways and so forth. If I think of my area, there must be a good 3 figures of shops fitting that description, for around 200k of population, all with those one or two recognisable styles of shop fitting.
As an aside barbers, I think, are a more mixed picture. There is a passage in Notes from a Small Island where Bryson takes a slow bus from Manchester to Wigan, iirc, and notes the hairdressers on pretty much every street. The baseline of legitimate business needed in this sector is quite high.
Exactly how much dirty money is there? I know it is lucrative but, good grief. Is a lot of this actually take over of our retail property estates by clean money - foreign investment firms and the like, who don't mind what then goes on underneath that to pay the returns?
dull anecdote alert
i was double parked on my local high street dropping a box off to a charity shop. One of these minimarts had recently opened nextdoor so I popped in as I needed a pint of milk.
Guess what - they didn't sell milk, guess I should have asked for some edibles instead.
Although if I do end up with a fuker as my constituency MSP I will enjoy watching them fall.
Hi Rochdale,
I think Banff is the best chance of a Reform constituency win, but you'll know better than me! Would all depend if the Tory vote collapses I guess
Yeah, the coast seat gets tipped for the fukers a lot. I have seen zero presence of Farage's mob - bar a trailer driven through our village this morning. And the usual large numbers of Big Tory Signs in all the fields.
One of my LD colleagues was fixated on the idea of farmers defecting from the Tories. Whilst it was a rational argument from a policy perspective, I haven't seen any signs of it.
Me? I'm voting Tory in the seat and LD on the list. My first EVER vote for the Tories.
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
Capability Brown Gertrude Jekyll Sir Christopher Wren Elizabeth Fry
Gertrude Jekyll, yes, a definite miss on my part.
Also, J.M.W. Turner* and Laura Knight.
(* But not Chocolate Box Constable - ugh!)
Pepys ?
Purcell should be in the list. Britain's greatest composer (with the possible exception of the almost forgotten, but enormously influential John Dunstaple).
Labour and Tories both up to around 30% by GE2029 I reckon.
Things like UK ICE, I don’t think this is where the UK public want to go (Reform). I also don’t think we want to make Jews feel like they’re imagining what is happening or that Russia is actually not so bad (Greens).
Labour have to lance the boil. And Badenoch needs to keep doing basically what she’s been doing. Just needs to calm down a bit.
If I were the Tories I would offload Badenoch. She is even more incompetent than Starmer. Fortunately I am not the Conservatives.
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
Capability Brown Gertrude Jekyll Sir Christopher Wren Elizabeth Fry
Gertrude Jekyll, yes, a definite miss on my part.
Also, J.M.W. Turner* and Laura Knight.
(* But not Chocolate Box Constable - ugh!)
Pepys ?
Purcell should be in the list. Britain's greatest composer (with the possible exception of the almost forgotten, but enormously influential John Dunstaple).
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
It's the scale of it that boggles my mind. The sheer number and turnover (in terms of shops opening/closing) of the types of mini marts, non functional takeaways and so forth. If I think of my area, there must be a good 3 figures of shops fitting that description, for around 200k of population, all with those one or two recognisable styles of shop fitting.
As an aside barbers, I think, are a more mixed picture. There is a passage in Notes from a Small Island where Bryson takes a slow bus from Manchester to Wigan, iirc, and notes the hairdressers on pretty much every street. The baseline of legitimate business needed in this sector is quite high.
Exactly how much dirty money is there? I know it is lucrative but, good grief. Is a lot of this actually take over of our retail property estates by clean money - foreign investment firms and the like, who don't mind what then goes on underneath that to pay the returns?
The best number I have for Trading Standards is that expenditure and staff are both down by approximately half since 2010.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
I'd go for Bede (though I'm not sure he's officially a saint ?).
I think he is, the Catholic Church made him a Doctor of the Church in 1899 and I think that included formal canonisation
Also in the early days of the church sainthood was by acclamation anyway, did that apply then? Though he is often referred to as 'Venerable' which implies only the first step along the way. OTOH the are Anglican churches dedicated to St Bede so clearly he is recognised as being a saint even without the Catholic formalisation of it much later. Anyway I'm no expert and I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will chip in.
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
It's the scale of it that boggles my mind. The sheer number and turnover (in terms of shops opening/closing) of the types of mini marts, non functional takeaways and so forth. If I think of my area, there must be a good 3 figures of shops fitting that description, for around 200k of population, all with those one or two recognisable styles of shop fitting.
As an aside barbers, I think, are a more mixed picture. There is a passage in Notes from a Small Island where Bryson takes a slow bus from Manchester to Wigan, iirc, and notes the hairdressers on pretty much every street. The baseline of legitimate business needed in this sector is quite high.
Exactly how much dirty money is there? I know it is lucrative but, good grief. Is a lot of this actually take over of our retail property estates by clean money - foreign investment firms and the like, who don't mind what then goes on underneath that to pay the returns?
Why do you think the government is gently prodding, rather than going after it seriously?
A few prosecutions but not wholesale.
Because of the economic implications - some areas, the remains of the high street would go. And some “leading businessmen” would suffer a reverse.
Remember how, after the care home visa fraud was shut down, a delegation went to No.10 to try and get it opened up again?
Labour and Tories both up to around 30% by GE2029 I reckon.
Things like UK ICE, I don’t think this is where the UK public want to go (Reform). I also don’t think we want to make Jews feel like they’re imagining what is happening or that Russia is actually not so bad (Greens).
Labour have to lance the boil. And Badenoch needs to keep doing basically what she’s been doing. Just needs to calm down a bit.
If I were the Tories I would offload Badenoch. She is even more incompetent than Starmer. Fortunately I am not the Conservatives.
And we are very pleased because Kemi is going nowhere
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
He replaced St Edward the Confessor, who, TBH was rather unlikely as a saint and St Edmond, of Bury St Edmonds fame.
And Good morning everybody. Sunny again and warmer.
Was he the one who taught Kemi that it’s more important to go after the launcher than catch the arrows?
The Iranians really are trolling Trump . With lots of fanfare they’ve announced the first revenue from the Hormuz toll deposited into the Iranian Central Bank.
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
I'd go for Bede (though I'm not sure he's officially a saint ?).
I think he is, the Catholic Church made him a Doctor of the Church in 1899 and I think that included formal canonisation
Nah Badenoch is fairly decent but she needs to develop her judgement. On Iran she was way too quick to jump in and same for calling Starmer a liar. Too quick.
But she’s biding her time well and given time the public will be prepared to listen IMHO. Would be wrong to get rid of her now.
Black children across England and Wales are almost eight times more likely to be strip-searched by police than their white peers according to a new report by the Children's Commissioner.
Nearly half of all searches resulted in no further action.
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
The Iranians really are trolling Trump . With lots of fanfare they’ve announced the first revenue from the Hormuz toll deposited into the Iranian Central Bank.
That is nothing compared to loss of revenue from the US blockade and threat to its oil from being prevented from sailing
My fear is Trump is prepared to keep this blockade in place indefinitely
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
He’s an utter loon.
I was thinking of voting Green in the District election, as the local candidate seems to have some sensible policies and I think the LD/Localist coalition could do with some opposition other than from the Tories who are the party of SUV-owning nimbies.
But from what I've seen of the direction taken by the Greens nationally I don't think I can in all conscience do that.
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
He’s an utter loon.
I was thinking of voting Green in the District election, as the local candidate seems to have some sensible policies and I think the LD/Localist coalition could do with some opposition other than from the Tories who are the party of SUV-owning nimbies.
But from what I've seen of the direction taken by the Greens nationally I don't think I can in all conscience do that.
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
I don’t think Goodwin etc are correct about this. For me a landlord should be able to advertise for specific tenants. Of course there would be uproar from the left if it were ‘white’ or ‘Christian’ instead of Muslim, but so what? They aren’t the left. I think there are far too many Muslims in the UK, but fair enough if people want to stick to their own, that’s human nature. It shows that multiculturalism doesn’t really work, but it never was going to.
This is outrageous. Landlords are illegally advertising for “Muslim only” tenants across London and the south-east, The Telegraph has found.
The property listings feature phrases such as “only for Muslims”, “for 2 Muslim boys or 2 Muslim girls” and “Muslims preferred”.
This is illegal, is unBritish, and should be shut down immediately.
Can you imagine the total uproar in Westminster & the BBC if landlords were advertising for “whites only” or “Christians only”?!
We don't have to - it wasn't that long ago there were signs saying "no blacks, no Jews, no Irish" and the like. I don't remember the Telegraph and people like Goodwin getting upset about that.
To take it further, some people don't want smokers in their property and say so. Others insist on only male or only female tenants.
I understand those seeking to make political outrage and capital out of this and at the same time I don't.
Should a property owner not have any say in who they choose to have as a tenant? Ideally, there would be no issues but living in the real world (which is more than Goodwin seems to), the old adage of "people like people like themselves" comes to mind.
I suppose it would be easier if discrimination were implicit rather than explicit.
Dancing on the head of a pin there, usual woke crap that we must not offend non whites but for whites you can crap over them all day as they are privileged.
I’ve got a weird story that I cannot prove but.. if it’s true…
I regularly shop at my local “nice supermarket”. Have done for years. To the extent long term staff and myself are on that “awkward nodding and mumbled hello” phase. Which is still nicer that not being recognised
Anyway the other day I was checking out food and the lady picked up my (very pricey) rack of lamb and she looked at it, then looked at me, then very obviously didn’t scan it and pushed it towards me. Basically giving it me for free
Why?? Maybe it’s because I’m now so old and broken down she took pity. But I doubt it. I’m not that old and decrepit and I regularly buy expensive stuff
Perhaps because I’m local? Maybe. But maybe it’s because I’m local and white. Because the other day I overheard staff quietly discussing politics and it was pretty clear they were right wing, pro reform, anti migration. Most of the staff are white working class unlike the customers who are 60-70% non white
I should add that, importantly, I have never noticed a shred of racism from staff, they are impeccably polite to everyone. When someone shoplifts they just sigh and tut and look distressed and I feel sorry for them. Doing a hard day’s work for not much pay and then someone comes in and does that must be heart breaking
So I could be entirely wrong. But maybe I’m right. Are we seeing whites favour whites as they become a minority? You could argue that’s human nature and inevitable. It’s a mirror image of Muslim landlords favouring Muslim tenants, that @isam mentions above
This is uncanny! I swear it is true
Yesterday, my Dad went to his local Tescos and accidentally walked out without paying for his shopping. He went back in to pay and said to the security man (Asian) "Did you see me walk out without paying?" and the bloke said yes! My Dad asked him if he was going to do anything about it and he said no! So he paid and then left, bizarre
But on the whole I think people from shared identity groups stick together, always have and always will, for good and ill....
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
He’s an utter loon.
I was thinking of voting Green in the District election, as the local candidate seems to have some sensible policies and I think the LD/Localist coalition could do with some opposition other than from the Tories who are the party of SUV-owning nimbies.
But from what I've seen of the direction taken by the Greens nationally I don't think I can in all conscience do that.
In a nutshell you have summed up why local government doesn't work in this country. Voting national in a local poll.
Capability Brown Gertrude Jekyll Sir Christopher Wren Elizabeth Fry
Gertrude Jekyll, yes, a definite miss on my part.
Also, J.M.W. Turner* and Laura Knight.
(* But not Chocolate Box Constable - ugh!)
Pepys ?
Purcell should be in the list. Britain's greatest composer (with the possible exception of the almost forgotten, but enormously influential John Dunstaple).
Id say quite an eye raising new MRP poll - Tories pushing Ref for largest party
As I said last year my expectation is that the Tories will be at about 27-29% and reform down on 20-22% by the end of this year and by the time the election rolls around I think the Tories will sit at about 31-33% with Reform down to about 15%. They just need to hold to their current course.
It won't be a massive victory or a landslide but right now the Tories are on course for at least most seats at the next GE IMO. Again Labour screwing up on jobs and tax really opened the door and Starmer being a complete shitbird has helped rehabilitate thr final years of Rishi/Hunt.
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
Commenters on this board regularly miss that Burnham is popular. We always hear "he couldn't win a by election". Well. He's consistently outpolled the Labour Party by a country mile in GM.
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
He replaced St Edward the Confessor, who, TBH was rather unlikely as a saint and St Edmond, of Bury St Edmonds fame.
And Good morning everybody. Sunny again and warmer.
Was he the one who taught Kemi that it’s more important to go after the launcher than catch the arrows?
It’s that day in the year when the most annoying people on earth say “AcKshUaLly St George WaS SyRiaN and WoulD be A RefUgee”
That bit doesn't bother me. What does is that England has a patron saint who isn't English and has no association with England. Could have picked someone worthy.
We could always switch to St Edmund. Plus it's a good excuse of a bank holiday in that long slog towards Christmas.
I think St Botolph needs a revival. Just for the name.
Ref UK will like him, as will cricket munchkins - the patron Saint of Boundaries.
St Botolph-without-Bishopsgate in the City of London has one of the great churchyards of the City, which contains an ex-Livery Hall as the church hall with Coade Stone statues, a tennis court you can hire, and a Victorian turkish bath. It is also one of the larger City Parks.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
New: Cat Little, cabinet office permanent secretary, disputes Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs select committee
Little says the Cabinet Office did NOT try to avoid Mandelson getting DV as Robbins claimed
Robbins told the committee the Cabinet Office’s position was that Mandelson did not need to undergo vetting
Little says she can produce an audit trail showing in fact there was a debate between security officials and the Cabinet Office advised the Foreign Office that Mandelson SHOULD undergo DV vetting
And she says the question was brought up by the Foreign Office
What an almighty mess. This is just going to on and on until Starmer is gone.
They're all tying themselves in knots over who said what to whom and when about DV.
That is not the error. The error was *appointing Peter Mandelson*
Keith was asked that question - why? - repeatedly and simply said "I have already apologised for that error of judgement". But can't face into what that was and why.
Putting it simply, the failure was deciding to appoint him, not everything that followed. "Nobody told me he failed DV" is laughable when DV can be overruled and now we have the Cabinet Office arguing that DV wasn't needed at all.
Mandie was Mandie. And they appointed him.
Here's my 30p. Starmer didn't appoint him. McSweeney did. Keith can't answer any more questions because to do so would expose him to the reality that he was not in charge.
I'll hold my hands up; I recall posting that I thought appointing Mandelson might turn out to be a good idea, if only because, apparently, Trump quite liked him (?saw a kindred soul in him) and that might well have turned in UK's interests.
What I didn't realise, and to be fair none of us knew at the time, were the shenanigans going on around the appointment. It would, I suggest, be helpful if Sir K were to a) apologise (again) for the appointment and b) apologise for the said shenanigans and, I suggest, offer Robbins his (or a similar) job. Assuming, of course, he didn't have to sack someone else to do so.
Mandy always caused complicated scandals, involving money and access, which led to his resignation.
Comments
As I've said, his best bet now is to come clean, apologise and, so far as individuals are concerned, make amends. If possible.
Last Con Govts
Johnson £800k loan facility
£bns PPE contracts to donors / friends (Mone, Meller, Marks etc)
Labour
Starmer Tickets, Suits, glasses
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/oct/26/companies-that-donated-to-labour-awarded-138m-in-contracts-study-finds
Comparison is Lab £138m vs Con £25bn
PWC, Fujitsu, KPMG, Capita etc probably "donate" to both parties, with in kind assistance to embed their people
https://x.com/KemiBadenoch/status/2047237004165890476
"Wriggle room if the killings did not in fact happen."
Those are the words of Keir Starmer's Attorney General, sent whilst dragging British troops through the courts.
The troops were innocent. Keir Starmer's judgement is not.
- polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded
- the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit
- then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max
- temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges
https://x.com/aaronjmars/status/2047017251270734309
My in-laws should certainly lean to Reform but neither would vote Reform as they dislike Farage. He’s smarmy is what they said yesterday.
It's notable that an earlier government, about a decade ago, had a target to have maternal deaths, and instead they've gone up. I don't raise this as a party political point, but I'm order to say that this is an issue that has had political attention, and yet it has still deteriorated.
So there's a problem with the political system failing, as well as in the maternity units themselves.
Some messages were leaked, where it became clear that the prosecution was about trying to get an armed police officer convicted - some in the CPS saw this as an important objective to put “the manners” on the armed police.
https://x.com/thatssobluesky/status/2047200540577214700?s=61
Utter melts
A younger Corbyn, with Green branding ?
The one thing I hoped for from this whole affair was that some light might be shed on the internal workings of the FO and Cabinet Office, but this just seems to be pure Yes Minister territory.
(Guardian)
Cat Little’s comment that Robbins refused to give her access to Mandelson’s vetting report, and the Foreign Office’s note of its decision to grant clearance, is confusing given two other remarks.
The first is that, in the end, she managed to get a copy of the UKSV summary directly from UKSV, which she is responsible for overseeing. So why did she need to go to the Foreign Office for this, though she would have needed the department to provide the note of its decision to grant clearance. We have learned this was an email from Ian Collard, the department’s head of security. Collard has been called to give evidence to the committee.
The second is Little has said that in September 2025, after Mandelson was removed from post, it was the Foreign Office security team that came to the Cabinet Office to ask to see a “number of documents relating to the vetting file”.
It is unclear why both departments appear to have asked each other for the UKSV documentation...
..Little says she delayed telling PM about Mandelson vetting recommendation because she wanted legal advice first
Little said she saw the UKSV report on Mandelson on 25 March.
She said she dicussed it with the cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, shortly afterwards. But they did not tell the PM until 14 April.
Asked why it took so long to inform him, she replied:
"I immediately sought legal … advice, because this is such an unusual thing for a government official to do, to handle that sort of security information.
I believe I have a responsibility to handle that sensitive information within the framework of both the law and the guidance that I’m subject to, and I did not feel that I could share that information until I understood the consequences and the authority that I had..."
Asked if she thought there would be a record of the meeting where Robbins and the Foreign Office head of security agreed that Mandelson’s vetting should be approved, Little replied:
"Civil servants are great administrators. We are famous for our record keeping, and the civil service code requires us, to take accurate notes, and to handle information within the legal framework."
As an alternative to answering yes or no, that final reply takes some beating, as it is capable of almost any interpretation.
I'd be a little bit worried about their presidential markets where there may be pressure to support whatever Trump says but as far as I can tell they've operated fairly to date.
To there are of course particular markets where insiders have the advantage and you shouldn't participate in those but that's not really Polymarket's fault.
This year the tedious St George hot takes are taking on another dimension.
He wasn’t English. It’s rarely mentioned
https://x.com/nonregemesse/status/2047241972776116666?s=61
As I said a few days ago, it is a mistake to assume - as many did - that all lawyers have good judgment. Starmer may have been a fine lawyer within his specialism but outside it he has shown poor judgment. Look at his first choices in his Shadow Cabinet, for instance.
People also assumed that because he was DPP he would be good at running things well. Hmm. I was very heavily involved in the investigation and criminal trial of what still remains the UK's biggest fraud trial in 2011/2012. The CPS were prosecuting. This was right in the middle of Starmer's tenure as DPP. The CPS were awful: they tried to offload the prosecution's disclosure obligations onto us, a third party, contrary to the law, and I - having got proper criminal law advice - had to push them back twice and tell them in writing that, no, they could not delegate their obligations as prosecutor onto us, which was pretty ballsy of me. They conceded and then, rather disgracefully, made the police apologise to me for the CPS's failure. It was appalling. Though it had the welcome result that the police and I then worked really well together, as we muttered to each other about "bloody lawyers not knowing the law"! The CPS solicitor who attended the trial was asleep most of the time. If such a big trial was at all emblematic of the CPS under Starmer it really does not speak well of his management abilities. Mind you the SFO were even worse.
Speculating on dates of a war, or negotiations to end it, for example, are clear examples.
There were a group of people arrested for betting on the date of the general election in the UK, when they had been in a meeting with PM Sunak when this was discussed.
So begs the question did they deliver to the spec they were given ?
I’ve been in supply chain many years and, in all the businesses and industries I’ve worked in, of the products aren’t to spec the supplier doesn’t get paid.
Perhaps the mugs paid them pro forma 😃
St Botolph-without-Bishopsgate in the City of London has one of the great churchyards of the City, which contains an ex-Livery Hall as the church hall with Coade Stone statues, a tennis court you can hire, and a Victorian turkish bath. It is also one of the larger City Parks.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62l429w2pko
Note that the leave out the fun bit - the ownership of the properties is used to launder the criminal profits. The criminals pay their bosses via a massively inflated rent.
When a disaster happens it is seen as a coming together of events. Surely it is only because or a coming together of events that Starmer ever got to uni and so became the menace he has undeniably been.
The most striking thing for me this week was the look of absolute bafflement on his face in the Commons when people were unimpressed and not satisfied by his grandeloquent statements. How could Kemi not accept and be delighted to accept his wonderful carefully crafted responses which showed that as always he was right all along.
More worryingly and Cyclefree seems to confirm this, in his previous life he could spout this balls and be thought a great man.
This whole Robbins business is a stinky red herring served up by Number 10. @keirstarmer appointed Mandelson, staff and civil servants implemented it, they are not to blame.
Edity - I should really have known this too as a one time geographer!
The reason for asking FCDO for UKSV's report is clearly that she needed documents off both, and as the FCDO had the UK's report she could just ask one person for both documents. It appears the FCDO had it on a confidential basis (or thought they did), which seems to surprise her.
Little sought legal advice because she clearly thought a civil servant was about to get scapegoated for a political f-ck up. Clearly someone was in the sh-t. As it turns out was Robbins, although I don't think he is blameless.
Also, J.M.W. Turner* and Laura Knight.
(* But not Chocolate Box Constable - ugh!)
Get legal advice to see whether you can share some details with the PM .
Not bothering to find out was a bad decision and he already said in exceptional circumstances you can share info .
How much more exceptional did it need to be ?
The media seem to have avoided this in their clamour to attack Starmer and paint Robbins as a martyr .
Id say quite an eye raising new MRP poll - Tories pushing Ref for largest party
Stumbled over a fossil and thought he’d claim the win
St Tedious Wankers day
As an aside barbers, I think, are a more mixed picture. There is a passage in Notes from a Small Island where Bryson takes a slow bus from Manchester to Wigan, iirc, and notes the hairdressers on pretty much every street. The baseline of legitimate business needed in this sector is quite high.
Exactly how much dirty money is there? I know it is lucrative but, good grief. Is a lot of this actually take over of our retail property estates by clean money - foreign investment firms and the like, who don't mind what then goes on underneath that to pay the returns?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/apr/23/dippy-injured-axolotl-welsh-river-tiktok
Things like UK ICE, I don’t think this is where the UK public want to go (Reform). I also don’t think we want to make Jews feel like they’re imagining what is happening or that Russia is actually not so bad (Greens).
Labour have to lance the boil. And Badenoch needs to keep doing basically what she’s been doing. Just needs to calm down a bit.
Happy St George's Day!
i was double parked on my local high street dropping a box off to a charity shop. One of these minimarts had recently opened nextdoor so I popped in as I needed a pint of milk.
Guess what - they didn't sell milk, guess I should have asked for some edibles instead.
There’s got to be a massive opportunity for the Tories here.
One of my LD colleagues was fixated on the idea of farmers defecting from the Tories. Whilst it was a rational argument from a policy perspective, I haven't seen any signs of it.
Me? I'm voting Tory in the seat and LD on the list. My first EVER vote for the Tories.
Brilliant reporting from @PronouncedAlva here. Polanski has certainly been on a journey - from Lib Dem centrist to Corbyn’s heir. Now he says he was wrong to have criticised Corbyn on antisemitism.
Purcell should be in the list.
Britain's greatest composer (with the possible exception of the almost forgotten, but enormously influential John Dunstaple).
Most 2024 Labour voters have a positive opinion of Andy Burnham, while also tending to see Angela Rayner favourably. They are, though, much less keen on Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood
Burnham: 55% favourable (+41 net)
Rayner: 48% (+15)
Reeves: 32% (-18)
Streeting: 28% (-6)
Mahmood: 18% (-12)
Burnham’s to lose.
A few prosecutions but not wholesale.
Because of the economic implications - some areas, the remains of the high street would go. And some “leading businessmen” would suffer a reverse.
Remember how, after the care home visa fraud was shut down, a delegation went to No.10 to try and get it opened up again?
But she’s biding her time well and given time the public will be prepared to listen IMHO. Would be wrong to get rid of her now.
My fear is Trump is prepared to keep this blockade in place indefinitely
But from what I've seen of the direction taken by the Greens nationally I don't think I can in all conscience do that.
Yesterday, my Dad went to his local Tescos and accidentally walked out without paying for his shopping. He went back in to pay and said to the security man (Asian) "Did you see me walk out without paying?" and the bloke said yes! My Dad asked him if he was going to do anything about it and he said no! So he paid and then left, bizarre
But on the whole I think people from shared identity groups stick together, always have and always will, for good and ill....
But he’s clearly Labour’s best option now.
Voting national in a local poll.
What is the spread compared with US, German, French, etc bonds?
It won't be a massive victory or a landslide but right now the Tories are on course for at least most seats at the next GE IMO. Again Labour screwing up on jobs and tax really opened the door and Starmer being a complete shitbird has helped rehabilitate thr final years of Rishi/Hunt.
We always hear "he couldn't win a by election".
Well. He's consistently outpolled the Labour Party by a country mile in GM.