OT This rotten Govt.Yet more scandal.

[mellowmiller]

So based on what the public know:
The PM wasn't aware he'd failed vetting.
The senior person who was has been sacked.
Opposing political parties want to disrupt the governing party.
Lies and agendas will be speculated about depending on individual leanings.

In terms of the reality, what have I missed?

What I've seen so far is a PM who's come to power, started to restore some semblance of normality in contrast to the chaos of 2019-24; has failed to become the transformative leader we were sold, but has presented a more technocratic holding pattern; has begun to restore economic credibility (which has come with a cost to many of us, but gets away from farcical schemes which aided the wealth divide); has resolved a lot of industrial disputes; has made it clear we're not a puppet for Trump; is struggling to sort 'cost of living'; has had to deal with typical Labour party divides and subsequent policy u-turns; has not been a poster boy in the world of personality politics. The man has not failed, is ticking more boxes than he's missing, and is a problem for the opposition (and those who claim to be 'the opposition'), so stories like this will be blown up by - we can play games, but let's be honest about it - media which is largely funded by those with right wing leanings.

Anything else?

Yes. He knew about Mandelson's history yet still appointed him without waiting for the outcome of the formal vetting process.
The previous government was equally clueless and this is just the sort of shambles Starmer would have jumped on when he was leader of the opposition.
Hypocrisy writ large!

[MillerBill]

Ulley,I appreciate it is near impossible trying to defend the indefensible but that summary of his "achievements" you have listed is very questionable and I am sure the hardworking tax payer would need more convincing.

[UlleyMiller]

Ulley,I appreciate it is near impossible trying to defend the indefensible but that summary of his "achievements" you have listed is very questionable and I am sure the hardworking tax payer would need more convincing.

It isn't a list of achievements, it's a view on what he's done, hasn't done, and a general precis of the time he's had in office. Any neutral observer will be able to point to a balanced term of office so far where he's neither ripped up trees, nor is creating the sort of shambles we'd witnessed under prior PMs. But in terms of the Mandelson issue, it's a fu** up that is growing arms and legs because of the agendas, not the issue. Starmer hasn't presented a Kwasi/Truss meltdown, or a Boris free-for-all, and his opponents want to apply pressure on anything they can. He's neither an inspiring, transformative leader, nor a complete mess, he's the ultimate grey man.

I've never been wholly committed to the left or the right in terms of parties because I think it pulls people into arguing for a side rather than being pragmatic and seeing the whole picture. I don't think the Mandelson mess is helpful to Starmer, and I think he has managed it sub-optimally, but I don't believe his involvement is a sound reason to remove a PM and the turmoil that carries, and I think his record overall is okay-ish.

[Back of the net]

It isn't a list of achievements, it's a view on what he's done, hasn't done, and a general precis of the time he's had in office. Any neutral observer will be able to point to a balanced term of office so far where he's neither ripped up trees, nor is creating the sort of shambles we'd witnessed under prior PMs. But in terms of the Mandelson issue, it's a fu** up that is growing arms and legs because of the agendas, not the issue. Starmer hasn't presented a Kwasi/Truss meltdown, or a Boris free-for-all, and his opponents want to apply pressure on anything they can. He's neither an inspiring, transformative leader, nor a complete mess, he's the ultimate grey man.

I've never been wholly committed to the left or the right in terms of parties because I think it pulls people into arguing for a side rather than being pragmatic and seeing the whole picture. I don't think the Mandelson mess is helpful to Starmer, and I think he has managed it sub-optimally, but I don't believe his involvement is a sound reason to remove a PM and the turmoil that carries, and I think his record overall is okay-ish.

How many manifesto promises has he broken ?
Would he have been sacked for eating cake at a gathering he shouldn’t have been at?
Has he acted with integrity ?

I think we know the answers. I respect your answers Ulley on most things but in terms of Starmer he’s indefensible.
Unfortunately he’s no different to others.

[ragingpup]

No response from the far left on here,about this shambles of a government's latest catastrophy.It's all about who can we blame and what can we cover up.The country meanwhile is being totally abandoned with all the domestic problems we have.What a mess !!!!!!

In my experience the far left are equally highly critical of Starmer, just for quite different reasons. Extremists are as extremists will, on both sides.

From what I can see, Starmer and the foreign secretary weren't told of the failed vetting. Should they subsequently be proven to have known, they will no doubt have to walk considering their continued denials. And rightly so.

It does make you think that whether both, especially the FS should have at least asked(considering Honest Pete's past) to see evidence of a successful vetting before Mandeleson being let loose on Trump, I think that's a fair question/criticism.

[howdydoo]

In my experience the far left are equally highly critical of Starmer, just for quite different reasons. Extremists are as extremists will, on both sides.

From what I can see, Starmer and the foreign secretary weren't told of the failed vetting. Should they subsequently be proven to have known, they will no doubt have to walk considering their continued denials. And rightly so.

It does make you think that whether both, especially the FS should have at least asked(considering Honest Pete's past) to see evidence of a successful vetting before Mandeleson being let loose on Trump, I think that's a fair question/criticism.

The bloke's up there with Boris when it comes to lying.

It needs to stop.



Clearance Granted: During a press conference in February 2026, Starmer explicitly claimed that the intensive vetting exercise had given Mandelson "clearance for the role".

[Beaufighter]

The govt. had 14 years to plan what they were going to do but we are all suffering because they really don't have a clue.

I?m not even disagreeing with you. But pretending the Tories aren?t AT LEAST as bad. Now that?s what I have issues with.

[Stovicmiller]

So based on what the public know:
The PM wasn't aware he'd failed vetting.
The senior person who was has been sacked.
Opposing political parties want to disrupt the governing party.
Lies and agendas will be speculated about depending on individual leanings.

In terms of the reality, what have I missed?

What I've seen so far is a PM who's come to power, started to restore some semblance of normality in contrast to the chaos of 2019-24; has failed to become the transformative leader we were sold, but has presented a more technocratic holding pattern; has begun to restore economic credibility (which has come with a cost to many of us, but gets away from farcical schemes which aided the wealth divide); has resolved a lot of industrial disputes; has made it clear we're not a puppet for Trump; is struggling to sort 'cost of living'; has had to deal with typical Labour party divides and subsequent policy u-turns; has not been a poster boy in the world of personality politics. The man has not failed, is ticking more boxes than he's missing, and is a problem for the opposition (and those who claim to be 'the opposition'), so stories like this will be blown up by - we can play games, but let's be honest about it - media which is largely funded by those with right wing leanings.

Anything else?

. Well said Prime Minister.

[Stovicmiller]

Or are you his spin doctor.

[Ericsladkilnhurst]

Big failure from Starmer
He has not shut the borders like other countries.
Immigrants coming in getting the benefits of social money, getting accomadation, no bills, free travel, straight onto pip some of them, getting a car on the mobility scheme.
Sons partner worked for Rotherham Council, told us of free phones, with ?10 a week put on them well before covid.
My mates wife in charge of immigrants, using RAF Finningley after RAF moved out of their housing, taking them to Dunhelm, Curry's etc for goods.
So not just Labour are the culprits.
Our NHS & Schools now over worked, some immigrants bringing diseases into our country.
But Starmer has shown he is not totally up to the job of running our country.
Our government needs to stop the invasion of immigrants,