Rayner's PMQs performance will trouble Starmer
Ange breezily mentioned Starmer's absence in the way you might mention you'd trod on a slug while gardening
Ange breezily mentioned Starmer's absence in the way you might mention you'd trod on a slug while gardening. As part of the Leader of the Opposition's weird 'deputy roulette' policy whereby she never quite commits to having one person filling in for her, the Tories had selected shadow home secretary Chris Philp to ask the questions this week. He did so with the air of a nervous schoolboy requesting an extension on his homework from a particularly sadistic schoolmaster.
Ange said she liked his tone – and initially at least, there was something of her previous camp frisson with Oliver 'Olive' Dowden. She eyed up Philp as a Montmartre madam might have looked upon a virginal subaltern. Was this shaping up to be a bit of a love-in? Not so. Things quickly grew spicier.
Soon, Ange was backed into a corner of having to defend the Prime Minister. Well sort of: tellingly she didn't quite justify or seek to defend his 'far-right bandwagon' remarks about the grooming gangs. Immigration, naturally, was what really set things on fire. The Tories had 'spivved their opportunity up the wall', said the Deputy Prime Minister, using what I think was a word entirely of her own devising.
The pair traded further broadsides. 'He was at the heart of the Home Office when we lost control of our borders,' boomed Ange. 'Goodness me she's got a cheek!' bellowed Mr Philp as Ange protested that the number of migrant hotels were dropping. That's one way of putting it.
Behind Ange were a pair of carefully positioned junior flunkies. They spent the whole of the performance rifling through folders and handing pieces of paper to – of all people – Lucy Powell. It brought to mind Operation Mincemeat, when the intelligence services placed important looking documents onto the body of someone who had accidentally eaten rat poison.
Anyway, the shuffling continued at a gentle pace until Mr Philp brought up the data on migrant hotels. This sent the general paper-based kerfuffle into overdrive. It was like watching a pair of chimps who had somehow found work as croupiers trying to shuffle a deck of cards.
'Dignity-vacuum of the week' went to Olivia Bailey – the MP for Reading West – who asked the now standard oily suck-up question from the Labour backbenches. Presumably they do this to try and get a place on the safe seat life-raft when the inevitable electoral Gotterdammerung happens. Would the Deputy PM 'confirm that THIS government will finally give my constituents the security they deserve?' gushed Bailey (it would be funny, if just once, the minister would take a stand against nauseating toadiness by replying 'no').
Philp ended with a question about the choice to keep a Zimbabwean paedophile in the country. Ange responded with an old Starmbot favourite: '14 years'. Different hair-style, different mannerisms, but the same reheated tripe.
And yet she did far, far better today than Sir Keir normally does. There was a charm and easiness of manner. Her delivery was less scratchy too; Starmer has the perpetual air of an about-to-be punched traffic warden telling an irate motorist to calm down, whereas Ange was more mob-adjacent landlady overseeing a lock-in. I suspect some Labour MPs will be quietly hoping that Starmer stays in Canada for another week.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
33 minutes ago
- The National
BBC Scotland breached standards with Labour peer on Debate Night
The BBC hosted a 'Glasgow Special' episode of the show on the night of June 4 – a day before voters were set to go to the polls for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. The panel show featured the SNP's Glasgow Council leader Susan Aitken, Scottish Tory MSP Annie Wells, artist David Eustace as well as both Scottish Labour MSP Paul Sweeney and Labour peer Willie Haughey. But the BBC didn't disclose that Haughey is a Labour peer – instead describing him as an 'entrepreneur' on social media and a Labour donor. READ MORE: Scottish 85-year-old pens scathing letter to Keir Starmer over immigration rules He has donated over £1 million to the party between 2003 and 2010. Now, the BBC's Executive Complaints Unit has ruled that it represented a breach of the BBC's standards of accuracy. 'The ECU accepted that the programme should have made Lord Haughey's status as a Labour peer clear and agreed that not doing so represented a breach of the BBC's standards of accuracy,' it wrote. 'It noted, however, that BBC Scotland had already published a posting to that effect on the Corrections and Clarifications page of the BBC website, and considered this sufficient to resolve the issue of complaint.' But it was the makeup of the panel (below) that drew particular anger from the SNP and the Scottish Greens. (Image: BBC/Twitter) An SNP source at the time told The National that Debate Night appears to have 'thrown the BBC's proposed guidance on balance out of the window' by including two Labour representatives. This was before we subsequently revealed that Eustace also appears to be a prominent Scottish Labour supporter. The Glasgow Greens submitted a formal complaint to the BBC, highlighting that it has far more elected representatives than the Tories – for example – and branding it a 'farce'. Now, the BBC have also responded to the complaint and argued that the panel makeup didn't breach its impartiality guidelines. 'While the composition of the panel would have been inappropriate for an item governed by the BBC's election guidelines, these apply in the case of by-elections only to coverage of the by-election itself or the constituency in which it is taking place,' the ECU ruled. 'The item in question was unconnected with the impending by-election, and focused on the future regeneration of Glasgow, a topic on which (as the ensuing discussion illustrated) there is a large measure of cross-party agreement.' The statement added: 'The ECU considered the composition of the panel appropriate to the circumstances and found no breach of the BBC's standards of impartiality.'
The Sun
37 minutes ago
- The Sun
Farage slams ‘two-tier justice' as Labour councillor who urged crowd to ‘cut throats' of far-right protesters is CLEARED
THE decision to clear a Labour councillor who encouraged a crowd to cut the throats of protesters has been slammed by furious Nigel Farage as an "outrageous example of two-tier justice". Ricky Jones was filmed at the anti-racism demonstration in Walthamstow, East London, after the Southport murders last summer making a slashing gesture across his neck. 5 5 5 He branded far-right demonstrators as "disgusting Nazi fascists" and said "we need to cut their throats". But Jones has now been found not guilty of one count of encouraging violent disorder following just over 30 minutes of jury deliberation. Reform UK leader Mr Farage said: "This is another outrageous example of two-tier justice." While Zia Yusuf - head of Reform's Department of Government Efficiency - said: "The UK is now a country in which those who have the correct 'regime' political views can openly call for their political opponents to be brutally murdered, be filmed doing so, and face no criminal consequence. "A watershed moment in British politics." Former Tory Housing Secretary James Cleverly said in a post on X: "This unacceptable. Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system." Jones, 58, had attended the protest in August last year following the murders of Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, Bebe King, six, and Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, in Southport. The representative for Dartford, Kent, was told by his party to stay away but attended regardless before being suspended. During a court hearing today, prosecutor Ben Holt said: "Last summer, three young girls were killed at a dance-themed party in Southport. "There was some hysteria… Some of that grief manifested itself in anger, and regrettably, violence." Furious Farage blasts 'It's a national EMERGENCY' as Starmer reveals 'ridiculous' migrant deal The horror brought out counter-protests, one of which Jones decided to go to, the prosecutor explained. Mr Holt continued: "He attended in the face of considered advice not to do so. "During that event, he made a speech, amplified through a public address system, to the crowd. "He called the other side disgusting Nazi fascists. He said that their throats needed to be slit. "He drew his finger along his throat as he said that. "This, in a setting where, we suggest, violence could readily have been anticipated. "We ask rhetorically, what did Mr Jones think was going to happen?" Jones later told police his speech was a response to seeing stickers planted on trains by far-right group National Front. He claimed they contained concealed razor blades and included the words: "National Front Rights for Whites". The councillor also apologised for the comments but said they were not meant to be "taken literally". Following the video of his speech being shared, Jones received a message telling him he was "on BBC News". Jones was said to have appeared "satisfied" and told the contact: "I served". He also co-authored a declaration on behalf of Labour, that read: "There is no excuse for what we've seen. No possible justification. "This is mindless criminal thuggery, fuelled and perpetrated by the far right spreading their divisive, destructive ideas on the streets and on social media." The court heard Labour had sent out an "instructive" email referring to the Southport rallies taking place across the UK at the time. It told its councillors to "follow the clear advice" issued by police, which urged anyone "not to take part in, attend, or encourage others to attend any sort of demonstration or counter demonstration". But Jones alegedly chose to "ignore" the advice, with the video showing him making a "conscious" decision to take to the stage and ask an aide to film his speech. In his evidence, Jones described the mood in the crowd at the time as "happy and joyful". The father-of-four and grandfather also told the court he felt "horrified" after realising what he had said. "When I had time to view the footage after the demonstration, I was shocked at what I had actually said," he told jurors. 5
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
'Keir Starmer has met his match in Liverpool - and his own goals are costing Labour the football vote'
New data shows football supporters at nationwide would rather vote Reform than back Labour. Fleet Street Fox argues Keir Starmer's betrayal of the Hillsborough Law shows how good he is at own goals There's something about a blend of football and politics that makes for a heady brew. Perhaps it's the tribalism, the down-to-the-wire elections, or the hope that, this time, your lot might finally be able to deliver. And, of course, the chance to shout at the telly for ignoring a BLATANT foul. Maybe it's just that both are run by men in suits who play with the happiness of millions, but more often than not leave you with an alleged meat pie and a deep sense of betrayal, while twatting around in a helicopter at our expense. But walk into any match day boozer on a Saturday afternoon and you'll hear the real state of the nation, filtered through lager, community and the honesty of people who know exactly whose side they're on. Their debate is a full-blooded tackle, studs up and sod the VAR. That is perhaps why Prime Ministers don't ever go there, and my but it shows. For if he had ever set an Islington brogue into a pub within spitting distance of Anfield or Goodison Park, he would know the depth of fury that would greet his failure to implement the Hillsborough Law he has promised half a dozen times, and hummed and hawed about since missing his own transfer-it-to-statute deadline of April. This, for those who don't know, is a bill that would make it a crime for a public official to lie. Not just when a mistake leads to the witness box, but when writing the first report, when briefing a superior or the media. It would have protected young police constables who were ordered to rewrite their pocket books after official negligence caused a deathly crush among Liverpool fans at Hillsborough Stadium in 1989. It would have meant that 97 grieving families wouldn't have had to fight for 20 years for the right inquest verdict. It would protect every little guy in the country, and make all the pompous fat cats keep their noses clean. Scousers - even the ones who support the blue team - have been solid Labour for a century. They've been on the raw end of entitlement and London dismissiveness for too long to ever vote any other way, and their ballot papers are traditionally weighed rather than counted. But when the PM didn't institute the Hillsborough Law "on day one" as he promised, when he missed the April 15 anniversary, and now as grumbles spread across Merseyside that it may never appear at all as a result of tinkering by civil servants who don't fancy being subject to it - they're snubbing Labour like it's just turned up in a Man Utd shirt and a bucket hat. A survey by More In Common has found that Liverpool has the lowest proportion of football supporters of any club in the country who'd back Starmer, at just 27%. Even that seems optimistic, when you consider the Runcorn by-election three months ago had a decent 46% turnout and Reform still pinched the seat by just 6 votes. Today you don't need scales, but instead a microscope to count the majority. Starmer has ducked and weaved, tried to placate the bureaucrat linesmen, and spent too much time dancing down the right wing. Despite having a team of 398 MPs, he has feigned a limp, tripped over his laces, and consistently failed to put the ball in the back of the net. It's just not what you expect from someone who holds the premiership, Gary. And it's not just the north west that feels let down. The survey shows the mood has turned sour on every terrace, with Reform top on the transfer list for fans of Premier League and lower league clubs, and even non-football fans. Football fans have long memories, and know when they're being fobbed off by a crap manager and a lack of investment. Hillsborough has deeper meaning in Liverpool and Sheffield, but its protections would resonate nationwide. Wages are stagnant, the NHS is in need of intensive care, and the waiting list for a dentist is worse than the queue for a Wembley final. On immigration, Starmer has failed to crow about the victories he's had in bringing down some big name people smugglers, but even that has not stemmed the flow of huddled masses trying to be somewhere, anywhere, other than Afghnistan, Syria or Iran. Into the void strides Nigel Farage, a yellow-trousered golf club bore who has never worked well in a team and wouldn't set foot in a stadium unless there was a camera crew and a spotlight involved. Even then he'd station himself in a VIP suite, not the terraces. Imagine him, stood baa-ing about how awful the team is: a cup of something warm and wet might be thrown, but eventually, people would just decide to steer clear. That's what's happening on Merseyside, where the disillusionment will never be enough to make them vote Tory but has already persuaded thousands to stay at home. It's underway too in Manchester, Newcastle, London, at the Sunday morning municipal pitches and the after-school clubs: Labour is a dirty word where just a year ago it was the best hope. People are tired of politicians who only turn up to wave a scarf once every 5 years. They're fed up of soft-handed tossers putting up prices and neglecting the foundations, people who talk a good game but never actually play one. They want a government, and a team, they can be proud of. Starmer promised all that when he took over, but he's ignoring the commentary since, and there's no analysis of what's going wrong in Liverpool. When he turns up there next month for conference, the odds are he'll be taking an early bath every night to avoid the people who aren't his fans any more. If Labour has lost Liverpool, and a football-playing PM has lost the terraces, then it's the biggest own goal of all time. In football, as in politics, you can't hope to win if you forget who you're playing for.
