[The Weeping Angel]

Starmer has responded to Blair on his substack.

https://keirstarmer.substack.com/p/tony ... ke-my-plan

Moreover, now is a good moment to reflect on the Government’s course. As I said when the results came through, I am not in the business of ignoring a message from the voters as stark as the one Labour received at the recent local elections. And the signal is that my Government needs not just to be better, but also to be bolder. On growth, defence, Europe, energy and opportunity, we do now need a bigger response than we anticipated in 2024. In a world that has become even more volatile, that is what our ‘change’ mandate demands.

Nonetheless, it will come as no surprise to hear that I do not agree with everything Tony says about Britain or the Government. And to explain why, it is instructive to return to the 2024 context and the despairing commentary about Britain’s perceived decline. It was a running theme of the campaign. Britain was in an unbreakable trap. A “doom-loop” so fiendish that escape was utterly inconceivable. Higher investment in public services, we were told, could not be achieved without risking the health of the public finances or throttling economic growth. Significantly reducing immigration was equally impossible without much the same effect. The loudly proclaimed truth was simple: any new Government would have to choose between rebuilding the economy, improving public services, or reducing immigration. At best, it was a trilemma.

Today, that hand-wringing commentary continues unabated. But the facts about Britain have changed dramatically. After a decade of austerity, a Labour Government has delivered record public service investment and performance is improving. We are on track to deliver the fastest reduction in NHS waiting times since the service’s creation in 1948. Net migration has fallen from a high of nearly 1 million towards the end of the Tory period of rule, to just 171,000 now. Knife crime is significantly down. The asylum backlog has been slashed by 46% with hotel use also falling. Childcare investment has saved working families an average of £8000 a year. And child poverty is set to fall by over half a million children. That is the biggest reduction in a single term of any British government, ever.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Mandelson described Starmer’s No 10 operation as ‘beleaguered and bereft’ in published files – UK politics live

I've long been a "Mandelson files" sceptic, and if this is the top story from the latest tranche, I'm not yet inclined to change my mind.

I'm wondering again about the wisdom of the backbenchers who forced all these releases on the Government. You could see what the other parties were doing from Mars. A fishing expedition that none of them would have put up with for themselves, dressed up with nauseating piety. The Greens and Plaid Cymru can be exempted in fairness to them, because they've not in the past held government roles in which they've shown their own commitment (0r lack thereof) to openness. But the Tories, the Lib Dems, and SNP? Nauseating indeed.

Journos too (the initial scoop having turned out to be overcooked) have steamed in (how many would have done if it was a Tory Government?). We don't need to know trivia like Mandelson having said something critical about Starmer's No.10 team (which has been changed, long ago). This is the stuff that comes out 30 years later, and we all have a good laugh).

[Tubby Isaacs]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/ ... partiality

If there are any young people reading, you probably won't believe me when I tell you that Michael Grade was once a highly respect media executive at LWT, the BBC and Channel 4.

Look at this dishonest rubbish. It's a posh version of the goonery that Trump appointees come out with.

Michael Grade, the recently departed chair of Britain’s media watchdog, has accused broadcasters of being “embarrassed” by GB News because it covers the “agenda of the majority”.

Grade, who has recently retaken the Conservative whip in the House of Lords after stepping down from Ofcom, said he was now able to give his real view on the rightwing broadcaster, which has faced repeated accusations of partial and misleading coverage.

“I can now speak [freely], as I’m not at Ofcom,” Grade told Politics Home. “I honestly think they’re embarrassed by the fact that there is a news organisation that has a different news agenda to them, that speaks to the agenda of the majority – if you look at the polls, a large swathe of the voting population, who have no voice on the BBC.


“Immigration, Brexit, these are all issues that don’t get the weight on the BBC, or haven’t been able to, that GB News will give, so what’s the problem?”

What this chap says.

Steven Barnett, a professor of communications at the University of Westminster, said: “Michael Grade appears to have rewritten the law on impartiality.

“It is up to parliament to decide whether it wishes to change the law, but in the meantime let’s hope that Ofcom under its new chairman [Ian Cheshire] is prepared to regulate GB News as parliament required.”

[Oboogie]

Mandelson described Starmer’s No 10 operation as ‘beleaguered and bereft’ in published files – UK politics live

I've long been a "Mandelson files" sceptic, and if this is the top story from the latest tranche, I'm not yet inclined to change my mind.

I'm wondering again about the wisdom of the backbenchers who forced all these releases on the Government. You could see what the other parties were doing from Mars. A fishing expedition that none of them would have put up with for themselves, dressed up with nauseating piety. The Greens and Plaid Cymru can be exempted in fairness to them, because they've not in the past held government roles in which they've shown their own commitment (0r lack thereof) to openness. But the Tories, the Lib Dems, and SNP? Nauseating indeed.

Journos too (the initial scoop having turned out to be overcooked) have steamed in (how many would have done if it was a Tory Government?). We don't need to know trivia like Mandelson having said something critical about Starmer's No.10 team (which has been changed, long ago). This is the stuff that comes out 30 years later, and we all have a good laugh).

The line appears to be that Mandelson was unfit for high office role because he was critical of Starmer's government - so where does that leave the Tories, and all the other opposition parties who are also critical of Starmer's government?

[Boiler]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/ ... partiality

If there are any young people reading, you probably won't believe me when I tell you that Michael Grade was once a highly respect media executive at LWT, the BBC and Channel 4.

Hmmm. I always thought he was a twat and when I heard him on The Media Show last week, it only reinforced my view.

[Yug]

The line appears to be that Mandelson was unfit for high office role because he was critical of Starmer's government - so where does that leave the Tories, and all the other opposition parties who are also critical of Starmer's government?

Away with your common sense led logical thinking. This is the new golden age of vibes and "my-aunties'-next-door-neighbour's-cousin-says...".

[The Weeping Angel]

Mandelson described Starmer’s No 10 operation as ‘beleaguered and bereft’ in published files – UK politics live

I've long been a "Mandelson files" sceptic, and if this is the top story from the latest tranche, I'm not yet inclined to change my mind.

I'm wondering again about the wisdom of the backbenchers who forced all these releases on the Government. You could see what the other parties were doing from Mars. A fishing expedition that none of them would have put up with for themselves, dressed up with nauseating piety. The Greens and Plaid Cymru can be exempted in fairness to them, because they've not in the past held government roles in which they've shown their own commitment (0r lack thereof) to openness. But the Tories, the Lib Dems, and SNP? Nauseating indeed.

Journos too (the initial scoop having turned out to be overcooked) have steamed in (how many would have done if it was a Tory Government?). We don't need to know trivia like Mandelson having said something critical about Starmer's No.10 team (which has been changed, long ago). This is the stuff that comes out 30 years later, and we all have a good laugh).

Top work from those MPs here.

https://bsky.app/profile/deargodwhatnow ... aj6jazfk22

[Tubby Isaacs]

I spoke too soon. The Watergate-like revelations have started. Actual Guardian headline.

Mandelson criticised Starmer’s lack of ‘verve’ and tendency to buckle under pressure

[Yug]

I haven't seen much evidence of Starmer buckling under pressure yet. Mind you, he's only been Prime Minister for two years.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Hmmm. I always thought he was a twat and when I heard him on The Media Show last week, it only reinforced my view.

He was able back in his day. He led Channel 4 into the 90s where it had to survive on its own advertising (whether you agreed with that or not, it was required by the 1990 Broadcasting Act). He'd also done well at the BBC, with his family background in entertainment and understanding of scheduling, which was key when the BBC was under more pressure than before to deliver audiences at prime time. He'd also been ahead of his time at LWT when he bought exclusive rights to show league football, breaking the cartel that had short changed football badly (absurdly, the Office for Fair Trading overruled). Football duly lost a lot of money and continued to go to shit for another decade (till Greg Dyke did the same thing as Grade, and it was this time allowed to stand).

Unfortunately his day was about 30-50 years ago. His appointment as Ofcom Chair was pretty blatant cronyism cunningly dressed up as an old hand.

[kreuzberger]

The Mandy dossier was being breathlessly trailed by many outlets this morning as "excruciating". It barely troubled a three on the Richter-Scale, yet the press are still looking for scraps. Even Chris Mason could barely maintain his erection.

Full marks to No. 10 for leading them into a lobster pot.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The Guardian was doing that as well.

They've moved on to something that sounds more substantial, Mandelson "lobbying" the Government after the election. Then again this stuff often flatters to deceive as well. I'm still waiting for chapter and verse on Lord Ali's corrupt use of his Downing Street pass. The Right would have said "The PM has known Lord Ali for many years, and values his advice". And that would have been it.

I guess we'll see.

[Youngian]

The Mandy dossier was being breathlessly trailed by many outlets this morning as "excruciating". It barely troubled a three on the Richter-Scale, yet the press are still looking for scraps. Even Chris Mason could barely maintain his erection.

Full marks to No. 10 for leading them into a lobster pot.

Evan Davis was also panting in ecstasy on PM only to deliver a griping conversation with another BBC correspondent about how there's nothing to jerk off about.

[RedSparrows]

Tickled me to read a snapshot on Bluesky of the Mandelson saying, in effect, that Labour needed more verve and to fix problems so people like them. Like half of Bluesky...

[Tubby Isaacs]

Yeah, lots of this stuff is "they need people like us to do what we say".

[mattomac]

I noticed they spent all day speculating that ministers were "Bracing themselves" for revelations from the files and then when the biggest revelation was Mandleson thought Starmer lacked certain qualities they've had to go full in even though its not really even that interesting and he even said something on Times Radio in the build up to the election 2 years ago. Though having your character criticized by such a two face Peadophille Pal isn't the worst thing and a bit like Blair and Grade, their world was 20-30 years ago.

Doctor Who fans have for a long time disliked Grade and he probably had a case for Baker but the series could have survived with a short hiatus rather than 15 years.

He also was against the BBC bringing it back, so even if his decision was right in 1990, he had 15 years later become increasingly detached from what the audience wanted as it was one of the hits of the 00's and 10's.

[The Weeping Angel]

I noticed they spent all day speculating that ministers were "Bracing themselves" for revelations from the files and then when the biggest revelation was Mandleson thought Starmer lacked certain qualities they've had to go full in even though its not really even that interesting and he even said something on Times Radio in the build up to the election 2 years ago. Though having your character criticized by such a two face Peadophille Pal isn't the worst thing and a bit like Blair and Grade, their world was 20-30 years ago.

Doctor Who fans have for a long time disliked Grade and he probably had a case for Baker but the series could have survived with a short hiatus rather than 15 years.

He also was against the BBC bringing it back, so even if his decision was right in 1990, he had 15 years later become increasingly detached from what the audience wanted as it was one of the hits of the 00's and 10's.

Grade didn't cancel the show in 89; that was down to his successors. He wanted to cancel it in 85, but the backlash forced him to go with a hiatus. In his appearance on Room 101, he complained the show was cheap; well, if you felt the show was cheap maybe you should have given it more money then.

[Tubby Isaacs]

If anyone had an umbrella at my school, one of us would open and close it repeatedly and say "Doctor Who monster!" We probably weren't the only people to make that joke. This was coincidentally about the time that Michael Grade was Controller of BBC1.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I see Kemi has shown her commitment to the important question of state that required all these messages to be released by alighting on a comment from Pat McFadden that lots of MPs wanted him to raise benefits.

Kath Viner and Labour backbenchers can do another lap of honor for serving up this succession of leg stump half volleys to the Right.

[Boiler]

If anyone had an umbrella at my school, one of us would open and close it repeatedly and say "Doctor Who monster!" We probably weren't the only people to make that joke. This was coincidentally about the time that Michael Grade was Controller of BBC1.

And gave us Eastenders instead.