Mailwatch(ed) Forum

mattomac wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 1:46 pm I do wonder who will get health now...

Well, Rayner's not got a portfolio right now.

Abernathy wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 1:56 pm I suppose the question now is whether any more cabinet ministers follow Streeting out the door, and if so how many, to try to force Starmer to resign, in the manner of Boris Johnson. If that happens, I may well be ending my time as a Labour Party member, as I view that as unacceptable. If Keir sticks to his guns and fights off any leadership challenge that may yet come, from Streeting or others, I will stay in order to vote for Keir as leader.

But Labour absolutely must not emulate the worst period of the Tories’ rule in this.

In two minds whether to go before or after any leadership election if Starmer is defeated, then again as Union member I should get a vote via that I think.

Streeting.

The only question that matters in government is whether we leave our successors a better situation than we inherited. Ambulance response times for heart attacks and strokes are now the fastest in five years. A&E waiting times are improving, with four-hour waiting figures also the best in five years. We’ve recruited 2,000 more GPs and satisfaction has risen from 60 per cent to 74.5 per cent since we came to office. We hit our target of recruiting 8,500 mental health staff three years early. We’ve achieved this at the same as balancing the books for the first time in nine years and smashing the 2 per cent NHS productivity target by achieving 2.8 per cent, which means the investment we’re putting in goes further and that the public can have greater confidence that their money is being well-spent.
None of this would have been achieved without the brilliant leadership team of ministers, officials, and special advisers we have established in the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS – superbly led by Samantha Jones and Sir Jim Mackey, who has been a knight in shining armour and a brilliant leader of 1.5 million staff upon whom all this success depends.
The National Health Service is the embodiment of all that is best about Britain and our values. Thanks to our Labour government, it is on the road to recovery: lots done, but so much more to do.

Which (assuming all of this is true) is great. Perhaps Wes could reflect on who provided the money to do this, and how the tax rises necessary might have contributed to their unpopularity. Now that's all happened under the old Health structure. Wes has insisted on a new one, has been backed by the Prime Minister do deliver it, and he fucks off.

mattomac wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 2:12 pm In two minds whether to go before or after any leadership election if Starmer is defeated, then again as Union member I should get a vote via that I think.

Unfortunately my union - as part of Prospect - is non-aligned.

Rayner, if the facts are as reported, does seem to have been lucky. You'll be surprised to know that the idiots who were attacking Dan for the Polanski problem are once again very much in evidence.

Streeting calls for leadership contest with 'best possible candidates' - saying Labour must offer 'bigger solutions'"

The Bigger Solutions Party should run in the next election. They'd get about 80%.

This person would be well advised to lock herself in her study and catch up on constituency work. She now tells us the PM who needed to be challenged isn't actually that bad?

Catherine West says she would not rule out voting for Starmer in leadership election - despite having led calls for contest
The former minister Catherine West kicked off the Labour leadership speculation when she announced on Saturday that, if no cabinet minister launched a challenge, she would try to stand as a candidate herself.

Since then she has rather changed her tune. On Monday she said she was not standing as a candidate, but was urging Labour MPs to back calls for a contest.

Today, in an interview on the World at One, West said that she would not rule out voting for Keir Starmer herself.

Spotted this in the Guardian's BTL:


I'm surprised the Guardian let that stand.

Samanfur wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 2:08 pm

mattomac wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 1:46 pm I do wonder who will get health now...

Well, Rayner's not got a portfolio right now.

Would be a very good solution, I think. No need to reshuffle either. And not actually that hard for her to row back from where she is at the moment. "Well, Robin (Day/Oakley- Christ, can we have them back), I've always said what I mean, and we need more people in politics who do that. I saw the local election results, just like you did. If someone had come forward and said they could do better, I'd have been all ears. Nobody has. Let's all get on with the job. I'm not Wes's greatest fan, as you've probably gathered, but we've made good progress at Health. I'm very proud to take lead the Department into the next phase where we can really start to improve the structure that we inherited from the Tories"

"Angela Rayner, have you done a deal with Andy Burnham?

Robin, Robin, I'm a Manchester MP and he's the Greater Manchester mayor. So we talk a lot..

Have you made a deal?

No. Next?"

Oh look who's shown up. I thought he was supposed to be a policy heavyweight, not a relayer of gossip that he's picked up from Wes Streeting's mates.

On the same programme, Stephen Bush, the FT commentator, said that Streeting does have more than 80 Labour MPs who would like to see him become leader. But he pointed out that some of those are in government, and reluctant to start a process that could lead to them leading their jobs.

Here's an MP I'd never heard of. Hopefully I don't hear much about him for a long time, and all.

The Labour MP Alan Gemmell was also on the World at One. He is a leading Wes Streeting supporter, and he was interviewed on the programme in effect as a quasi spokesperson for the campaign.

He claimed Streeting did have the support of 81 Labour MPs (enough to launch a leadership challenge). He said:

[Streeting] has the support of the right number, of more than 81 MPs in the party.
But he’s taken a principled decision today not to trigger that contest … It’s clear in conversations with MPs and with the unions that the party wants a discussion, a battle of ideas, an open contest, a broad contest for the direction that we should take and how we fix the problems that we’re in.

We'd be better off with Archie Gemmill.

"Battle of ideas". It's a government, not the school debating society. There's a manifesto and the King's Speech. Of course, things can be added to that, taken out, amended. But the idea it could all be chucked on the basis of an internal battle of ideas without a general election is laughable. Good luck with running on a pitch of "you know that last thing we put before you? It was rubbish! We're putting something else before you! Vote for this!"

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 3:02 pm This person would be well advised to lock herself in her study and catch up on constituency work. She now tells us the PM who needed to be challenged isn't actually that bad?

Catherine West says she would not rule out voting for Starmer in leadership election - despite having led calls for contest
The former minister Catherine West kicked off the Labour leadership speculation when she announced on Saturday that, if no cabinet minister launched a challenge, she would try to stand as a candidate herself.

Since then she has rather changed her tune. On Monday she said she was not standing as a candidate, but was urging Labour MPs to back calls for a contest.

Today, in an interview on the World at One, West said that she would not rule out voting for Keir Starmer herself.

“The Prime Minister is the right man for the moment”*



* A quote from The Thick Of It. West is giving off strong Nicola Murray vibes

They've fucked this up so badly.

The PM can give a "put up or shut up" speech (preferably without resigning as the leader of the party, why did Major do that?). The MPs then agree that they can't agree on a successor. And it's all back to work, with a new Health Secretary (Rayner, Angela).

This won't happen.