Dan Hodges is conflating two distinct stages in the process to reach a conclusion that suits his argument - and he’s not alone in doing so. When challenged previously, Keir Starmer said that Peter Ma… (View Post)

That’s a separate issue. The question you’ve raised is whether the PM should have waited for vetting to conclude before making the appointment. The point I was making is about what the PM should be t… (View Post)

Case’s advice raises serious concerns - very serious concerns. In plain terms, the Prime Minister was told by the country’s most senior civil servant to submit the proposed name, allow proper vetting… (View Post)

The difficulty with that argument is the newly disclosed advice from Case, which explicitly says the Prime Minister should be made aware of any issues raised during the vetting process. If we accept … (View Post)

As I said last week, words and language matter. In this case there’s no clear basis to say Keir Starmer lied. Security vetting is designed to be comprehensive, so it would be expected to cover all re… (View Post)