Latest news with #CamillaTominey
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Starmer has entered the ‘degeneration' phase. His MPs are in despair
Shortly after the general election, The Daily T – the podcast I present with colleague Camilla Tominey – held a live event for Telegraph readers at our headquarters in central London. It was a very jolly affair, with prosecco on hand as Camilla, Gordon Rayner, our Associate Editor, and I discussed the state of politics and answered questions. The biggest worry in the audience was that Starmer was simply Tony Blair in disguise, and was being 'run' by Labour's most successful Prime Minister in history via his think tank, the Tony Blair Institute. This was nonsense, I suggested. Blair was far too Right-wing for Starmer. Chatting afterwards, a number of attendees came up to me to make a point about what being 'Prime Minister of the country' meant to them. 'We have to give him a chance,' one Conservative voter said. 'He won, it's good to end the chaos, and he is the leader now. As long as he is sensible, we will see how it goes.' This is a very British view of politics and one I wholeheartedly support. The office of Prime Minister is one to be respected, politicians need time to affect change and following the psychodramas of Boris Johnson and the rest a period of calm would be very much welcomed. I wonder how that Conservative voter is feeling now. After a reasonable opening day speech about governing for everyone, Starmer has induced nausea. Freebie gifts revealed that it was still 'one rule for them'. With no discussion or preparation, the Winter Fuel Allowance was scrapped for all but the lowest paid pensioners. A £22 billion 'black hole' appeared to come as a shock to the Chancellor despite every sensible analyst saying before the election that the public finances were shot. The Budget raised taxes after Labour promises that it would not. 'I need to fix the foundations,' Rachel Reeves told voters as the polls started slipping. Starmer agreed. 'Growth' was everything and 'tough Labour' would not be indulging in any U-turns. Even that gargantuan and ever-increasing benefits bill would be tackled. Being controversial can have a point in politics – as long as you stick to the course. Starmer has done the opposite, the lead character in a political tragedy about a man who wanted to be king but did not know why. The PM has confused noise from opponents, backbenchers and pressure groups with the very different purpose of running the country. The result has been strategic chaos – a disaster for anyone residing in Number 10. Where once he was positive about the effects of immigration, now he is talking about 'an island of strangers'. Where the cuts to the Winter Fuel Allowance were an absolute necessity – now they will be at least partially reversed (although when and by how much will be a political running sore for months to come). The two child benefit cap is likely to be lifted. The UK will be in and not in the European Union. I speak to many senior Labour figures every week. They pinpoint the disastrous local elections as the moment Starmer buckled afresh, casting around in desperation for anything that might shift momentum. A caucus of Red Wall Labour MPs, led by Jo White, demanded changes, particularly to disability benefit cuts. 'We will not budge,' Downing Street insisted, exactly as they had done over the Winter Fuel Allowance. Few believe that position will hold. Negative briefings are starting to swirl around Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. Enemies point out, and there are many, that the 'hard choices' approach has given way too easily to 'I'll U-turn if you want me to'. Policies that MPs expended a lot of energy defending are now being abandoned, the quickest way to lose faith on the back benches. Nearly 200 Labour councillors lost their jobs in the May elections, a rich seam of angry activists who blame the man at the top. Starmer and Sweeney go back, to the dark days of the Hartlepool by-election loss in 2021 when Labour was trounced by the Conservatives. Starmer considered quitting and outsourced much of his political thinking to McSweeney, who picked him up and dusted him off. The Corbyn-lite approach that had won the PM the Labour leadership was jettisoned and 'sensible Starmer' took its place, the dry technocrat who would focus on what works. Labour MPs of the modernising tendency fear Corbyn-lite is creeping back. Adrift in a sea of collapsing personal ratings, Starmer is trying his own form of 'back to basics' – the basics of 'all will have jam' Left wing economics. 'We have no idea who is driving the bus,' said one well placed Labour figure on the chopping and changing at the centre. 'It is not about jam today or jam tomorrow. With no growth there is no jam.' Reeves is in an increasingly precarious position. She marched into the gunfire with a degree of political bravery, insisting that her decisions had to be taken to re-energise the economy. My Treasury sources insist there are glimmers of hope that the strategy is working. The first three months of the year saw growth above estimates. Business confidence has started to pick up. In the spending review on June 11, the Chancellor will announce billions of pounds in capital investment in transport hubs, energy, schools, hospitals and research and development. These are the right policies. The PM is striding in the opposite direction, creating a tension between Number 10 and Number 11 that never augurs well for good government. When Labour published its manifesto in 2024, the only person beyond Starmer himself to appear regularly in the glossy photographs was Reeves. Now it would be Angela Rayner, who is noisily demanding more tax rises. Like grief, governments travel through five phases. Euphoria, honeymoon, stability, degeneration, failure. Starmer has managed to leap-frog the first three and has entered 'degeneration' well before the first anniversary of a victory which gave him a 171 seat majority. Even his allies look on baffled, failing to understand that government is difficult, that you cannot gyrate between policy positions and expect appalling poll numbers to improve. Leading requires courage, vision and an ability to communicate. Consistency is the prosaic truth that the Prime Minister has failed to grasp. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Starmer has entered the ‘degeneration' phase. His MPs are in despair
Shortly after the general election, The Daily T – the podcast I present with colleague Camilla Tominey – held a live event for Telegraph readers at our headquarters in central London. It was a very jolly affair, with prosecco on hand as Camilla, Gordon Rayner, our Associate Editor, and I discussed the state of politics and answered questions. The biggest worry in the audience was that Starmer was simply Tony Blair in disguise, and was being 'run' by Labour's most successful Prime Minister in history via his think tank, the Tony Blair Institute. This was nonsense, I suggested. Blair was far too Right-wing for Starmer. Chatting afterwards, a number of attendees came up to me to make a point about what being 'Prime Minister of the country' meant to them. 'We have to give him a chance,' one Conservative voter said. 'He won, it's good to end the chaos, and he is the leader now. As long as he is sensible, we will see how it goes.' This is a very British view of politics and one I wholeheartedly support. The office of Prime Minister is one to be respected, politicians need time to affect change and following the psychodramas of Boris Johnson and the rest a period of calm would be very much welcomed. I wonder how that Conservative voter is feeling now. After a reasonable opening day speech about governing for everyone, Starmer has induced nausea. Freebie gifts revealed that it was still 'one rule for them'. With no discussion or preparation, the Winter Fuel Allowance was scrapped for all but the lowest paid pensioners. A £22 billion 'black hole' appeared to come as a shock to the Chancellor despite every sensible analyst saying before the election that the public finances were shot. The Budget raised taxes after Labour promises that it would not. 'I need to fix the foundations,' Rachel Reeves told voters as the polls started slipping. Starmer agreed. 'Growth' was everything and 'tough Labour' would not be indulging in any U-turns. Even that gargantuan and ever-increasing benefits bill would be tackled. Being controversial can have a point in politics – as long as you stick to the course. Starmer has done the opposite, the lead character in a political tragedy about a man who wanted to be king but did not know why. The PM has confused noise from opponents, backbenchers and pressure groups with the very different purpose of running the country. The result has been strategic chaos – a disaster for anyone residing in Number 10. Where once he was positive about the effects of immigration, now he is talking about 'an island of strangers'. Where the cuts to the Winter Fuel Allowance were an absolute necessity – now they will be at least partially reversed (although when and by how much will be a political running sore for months to come). The two child benefit cap is likely to be lifted. The UK will be in and not in the European Union. I speak to many senior Labour figures every week. They pinpoint the disastrous local elections as the moment Starmer buckled afresh, casting around in desperation for anything that might shift momentum. A caucus of Red Wall Labour MPs, led by Jo White, demanded changes, particularly to disability benefit cuts. 'We will not budge,' Downing Street insisted, exactly as they had done over the Winter Fuel Allowance. Few believe that position will hold. Negative briefings are starting to swirl around Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. Enemies point out, and there are many, that the 'hard choices' approach has given way too easily to 'I'll U-turn if you want me to'. Policies that MPs expended a lot of energy defending are now being abandoned, the quickest way to lose faith on the back benches. Nearly 200 Labour councillors lost their jobs in the May elections, a rich seam of angry activists who blame the man at the top. Starmer and Sweeney go back, to the dark days of the Hartlepool by-election loss in 2021 when Labour was trounced by the Conservatives. Starmer considered quitting and outsourced much of his political thinking to McSweeney, who picked him up and dusted him off. The Corbyn-lite approach that had won the PM the Labour leadership was jettisoned and 'sensible Starmer' took its place, the dry technocrat who would focus on what works. Labour MPs of the modernising tendency fear Corbyn-lite is creeping back. Adrift in a sea of collapsing personal ratings, Starmer is trying his own form of 'back to basics' – the basics of 'all will have jam' Left wing economics. 'We have no idea who is driving the bus,' said one well placed Labour figure on the chopping and changing at the centre. 'It is not about jam today or jam tomorrow. With no growth there is no jam.' Reeves is in an increasingly precarious position. She marched into the gunfire with a degree of political bravery, insisting that her decisions had to be taken to re-energise the economy. My Treasury sources insist there are glimmers of hope that the strategy is working. The first three months of the year saw growth above estimates. Business confidence has started to pick up. In the spending review on June 11, the Chancellor will announce billions of pounds in capital investment in transport hubs, energy, schools, hospitals and research and development. These are the right policies. The PM is striding in the opposite direction, creating a tension between Number 10 and Number 11 that never augurs well for good government. When Labour published its manifesto in 2024, the only person beyond Starmer himself to appear regularly in the glossy photographs was Reeves. Now it would be Angela Rayner, who is noisily demanding more tax rises. Like grief, governments travel through five phases. Euphoria, honeymoon, stability, degeneration, failure. Starmer has managed to leap-frog the first three and has entered 'degeneration' well before the first anniversary of a victory which gave him a 171 seat majority. Even his allies look on baffled, failing to understand that government is difficult, that you cannot gyrate between policy positions and expect appalling poll numbers to improve. Leading requires courage, vision and an ability to communicate. Consistency is the prosaic truth that the Prime Minister has failed to grasp.
Daily Mail
14-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
This Morning star sparks frenzied guessing game as she details rude encounter with A-list 't**t'- so can YOU figure out who it is?
Journalist Camilla Tominey sent X/ Twitter into meltdown on Tuesday as she asked followers to guess the British celebrity she had a rude encounter with that evening. The presenter, 46 - who regularly appears on This Morning and has her own GB News show - took to social media to reveal she had bumped into a star she'd interviewed before he was famous, but he had proceeded to give her the brush off. She penned: 'Guesses please. Which well known British celebrity, when I approached him tonight in a genial manner to reminisce over interviewing him, over lunch, before he was famous, responded curtly: 'I don't remember anything before I was famous'?' Camilla clarified that it was not done in jest, as a follower asked: 'Was that said in a *I'm a star now so leave me alone' way, or in a humorous way? If its humour it's quite smart', to which she responded: 'The former'. Several celebrities were put forward as the possible culprit, with Camilla confirming it was not Nigel Havers, Michael Sheen, Ed Sheeran, Benedict Cumberbatch or a politician. As one follower revealed the answer, Camilla warned: 'Stop spoiling it for new entrants. This is 8 out of 10 T**ts'. So have you guessed who it is yet? Journalist Camilla Tominey sent X/Twitter into meltdown on Tuesday as she asked followers to guess the British celebrity she had a rude encounter with that evening Camilla revealed she was referring to Jimmy Carr - one of Britain's best known and richest comedians - and host of 8 Out Of 10 Cats. When asked if it was 'the one with the annoying laugh and surname is something you drive?', she responded: 'Possibly', to which the fan followed up: 'Yes, I've heard the same hence the guess.' Another then guessed: 'Jimmy Carr'? to which she responded: 'Bingo! Advance to Mayfair'. One questioned: 'I've just been through Google but I can't find an interview with a beloved British celebrity', to which Camilla explained: 'It never ran- he wasn't famous enough.' She concluded by tweeting: 'What a Carr-y on. Night night x'. MailOnline has contacted Jimmy's representative for comment. It's not the first time Jimmy has been accused of rubbing up a This Morning presenter the wrong way. Last year, he was branded 'rude' by viewers after he continuously interrupted chef Clodagh McKenna's cooking segment. He was due to chat with hosts Alison Hammond and Dermot O'Leary but before his segment, he watched the Irish chef and author in the kitchen and couldn't help make a series of quips. Clodagh put on a polite grin following a series of barbed comment as Dermot wrapped an arm around the TV chef to comfort her and said: 'It's hard work when your being heckled by one of the UK's comedian'. Jimmy recently hit back at critics as he insisted that 'there's a real functionality' to making jokes about 'terrible' events. He was found himself embroiled in controversy several times over the years for making quips about 9/11 and the Holocaust, previously admitting he was 'a dab hand at [being cancelled] now.' But speaking to The Times in March, he insisted with comedy where it is today that 'it feels like you can do whatever you want now'. Jimmy admitted that his edgier jokes were 'slightly playing with fire', but that his 'intention' behind them was the most important thing, believing that they could be used as a way to 'make sense of' difficult topics. He said: 'Intention is important. With me, it's clear what the intention of the evening is. But the way it can get reported is as if you're shouting jokes through someone's letterbox at 9am. 'I subscribe to the benign violation theory — that jokes are benign violations. You take a violation, no matter how extreme, but make it benign by joking about it. 'Jokes can be a way to make sense of stuff. Think about how we use humour in our lives when something terrible happens, never mind on stage. There is a lot of laughter around grief, death and disease. There's a real functionality to it. It makes something OK.' The host went on: 'It's slightly playing with fire, but you don't choose your sense of humour. It chooses you. It's like sexual taste. Some like it spicy, others prefer milder stuff. But you don't fake a laugh.' He added that he felt that 'it's slightly a golden age, at the moment, for comedy', referencing Peter Cook's impression of then Prime Minister Harold Macmillan in 1960s, before the abolition of theatre censorship in 1968.
