[Abernathy]

I’m not yet convinced that there are hordes of Labour MPs whose dearest wish is to hand Starmer his sandwiches wrapped in a road map before the next general election comes around.

There is still no better person to be Prime Minister than Keir Starmer. Not remotely. And there is no eager successor waiting in the wings. Rayner is still tied up with her little misunderstanding with the Inland Revenue, Burnham is still out of parliament and not getting back any time soon, and Streeting has a distinctly perilous looking majority of 500 in his constituency to worry about. So unless Karl Turner fancies his chances, it’s nothing doing.

[Youngian]

There is still no better person to be Prime Minister than Keir Starmer. Not remotely. And there is no eager successor waiting in the wings.

As for the opposition, the person Labour fears is... err. I suppose Farage is a problem but he's on his last lap.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Starmer's properly gone after Ollie Robbins. Tmrw could be interesting.

[Tubby Isaacs]

It's already interesting. Ollie Robbins is claiming he had pressure from the Cabinet Office to the effect that Mandelson didn't even need vetting.

Olly Robbins has given remarkable evidence so far. He has spoken about the pressure the Foreign Office faced from Downing Street – weeks before he took the top job – about ensuring Peter Mandelson made it to Washington as ambassador. That included, Robbins claims, a discussion between the Cabinet Office and the Foreign Office as to whether or not Mandelson even needed to go through the vetting process.

I think Starmer may be in trouble here, though this could be arse covering.

[Andy McDandy]

Not seeing many names here, just offices spitting at each other.

[Tubby Isaacs]

On the other hand, Robbins confirms that "failed vetting" is misleading.

Robbins says Mandelson's vetting decision 'borderline'
Robbins confirmed that the decision about Mandelson’s developed vetting was “borderline”. (See 8.57am.)

I was told that UKSV [UK Security Vetting] were leaning towards recommending against, but accepted it was a borderline case.
He said that, although reporting suggests this is process you pass or fail, that is not how the system works.

Reporting from The Guardian when it broke the story and everyone else followed because they want Starmer out. How different this might be if they'd reported the process accurately. I don't think we'd even be talking about this.

You might have noticed, I'm not happy at all with The Guardian. It's been headhunting a politician it doesn't like, just like all the rest of them.

We'll see what the Cabinet Office stuff amounts to.

[Tubby Isaacs]

UK unemployment shows surprise fall to 4.9% as pay growth drops to lowest in five years
Bank of England expected to keep interest rates on hold as Iran war casts shadow over labour market

Quite a large fall too (from 5.2%). Possibly a fluke or possibly business was adjusting to the higher costs better than lots of people expected.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Robbins said he trusted UKSV when they said they could manage risks associated with appointing Mandleson

So this also suggests Mandelson never failed anything.

[Boiler]

This all feels like the Fourth Estate, broadcasters and twatcasters with Reassuringly Large Microphones (TM) engaging in a bloodsport, because Starmer isn't a populist prick like Farage or Plankski.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Guardian headline on the liveblog. Astonishingly it's not "We guilded the lily for clicks when we told you Mandelson had failed vetting". Nor "Starmer didn't know despite us saying for days that he must have done".

Cabinet Office suggested Mandelson did not need security vetting, says Robbins as he describes ‘constant pressure’ from No 10

[Tubby Isaacs]

Olly Robbins: I was asked to find job for Starmer aide and not tell David Lammy
Sacked civil servant says No 10 pushed Foreign Office to find diplomatic role for Matthew Doyle, without mentioning it to foreign secretary

This is an actual story. The kitchen sink is being chucked at Starmer.

Roughly translated: "I'll speak to a member of my Cabinet myself when I'm ready" said PM.

[Tubby Isaacs]

This is incredibly damning for Keir Starmer.
Not content with appointing Peter Mandelson as US ambassador despite his links to Epstein, he tried to appoint another man with a known friendship with a sex offender.
This is not just a lapse in judgment, it’s a pattern of behaviour.
Every day this scandal gets worse, and it becomes clearer that the only way to draw a line under it is for Starmer to go.

This is pathetic stuff. Doyle was appointed as Director of Communications, until he was sacked. ages ago. When nobody knew any more than that he supported the accused before the trial. Now it's a scandal that he asked about another job he didn't get?

I almost hope Davey and Polanki get to form a government together, absurd though that is, seeing that this is what so many people in politics and liberal media apparently want.

[Tubby Isaacs]

What's the pattern of behavior, Ed? Come on, tell us. You're doing lABOUR pAEDOS, aren't, you?

[Tubby Isaacs]

I see she's on to 'due process not followed", though she doesn't tell us what that means.

Kemi Badenoch claims that Olly Robbins evidence shows that “due process” was not followed in the appointment of Peter Mandelson, and that therefore Keir Starmer misled MPs when he claimed it had been.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Again Andrew Sparrow has given a mostly fair summary. Of Robbins:

Mostly, he did not say anything that directly contradicts what Keir Starmer told MPs yesterday. They both agree Starmer, and No 10 generally, were not told about the reservations UKSV (UK Security Vetting) had about Peter Mandelson.

So they laid it on massively thick then, and had they reported the whole story, we wouldn't be here?

He's nonetheless said that Labour MPs will be appalled that the PM thought Andrew Doyle could be an ambassador? I mean, really?

[Abernathy]

The more this drags on (and on, and on, and on) the more it seems to me that this is simply a matter of an administrative error in a flawed pre-existing procedure - and nothing more than that (the actual appointment decision was a huge mistake for which Starmer has already admitted culpability and apologised for). A sane polity would recognise that, and move on to far more important business.

Kemi Badenoch obviously thinks she can smell blood, and she has the entire right-wing news media backing her up, but Ollie Robbins hasn't said anything damning that would warrant Starmer having to go, let alone delivered a smoking gun, so this nonsense really should die. Not holding my breath, mind.