Tuesday, July 07, 2026
Why Plaid should not repeat their badger cull policy
An article by Billie-Jade Thomas, the Senior Public Affairs Manager for the RSPCA, on the Institute for Welsh Affairs site reports that while it is still very much early days for the new Plaid Cymru minority government and the expanded Senedd, tackling Bovine TB (bTB) has already been raised in Plenary on several occasions, by parties for and against badger culling.
She says that the RSPCA has identified the potential introduction of a badger cull as one of the biggest threats to animals in Wales in the coming years, with Plaid Cymru having included references to ‘wildlife control’ in dealing with bTB in their election manifesto:
While we understand – and agree – that effectively managing bTB can have a significant impact on improving farmers’ mental health and wellbeing, as well as the health and welfare of their cattle, we remain firmly opposed to badger culling as the solution. This is based on both scientific and animal welfare evidence.
Badgers are a protected species by law, and are considered one of our most iconic and popular species of native wildlife. Recent polling undertaken by Savanta on behalf of the RSPCA backs this sentiment, with 73% of people in Wales selecting badgers as one of the species they are most concerned about when given a variety to choose from. Furthermore, more than half of those polled (54%) recognised them as ‘iconic British mammals’ when asked what associations they have with badgers, with 43% considering them ‘heavily misunderstood’. Notably, only one in five (20%)* consider them to be ‘disease spreaders’.
Badger culling has been happening in England intensively every year since 2013, which has resulted in over 247,000 badgers being killed as part of its disease prevention programme. However, there is still no scientific consensus that the culling of badgers has been effective in reducing bTB in cattle in England, with the disease still prevalent across the border. While some stakeholders continue to believe that badgers play a major role in the spread of bTB, the science is now clear and there is consensus that this is incorrect. It is now widely recognised that the majority of bTB is transmitted between cattle, with a growing body of robust scientific evidence showing that the majority of infection occurs within and between herds. This was also acknowledged in the UK Government’s new strategy for England which was published on the 10th of June which recommends stricter measures to prevent cattle-cattle infections.
Badger culling has not been used by the Welsh Government since 2012. Still, new herd incidents of bTB in Wales have declined by over 40% since 2010, due, in part, to the various measures put in place over the last decade to limit transfer of the disease between infected cattle. According to the latest quarterly data, herd prevalence is currently at its lowest value since January 2017. New data published on the 17th of June shows a decrease of 23% in relation to new herd instances in Wales covering the 12 months to March 2026. Meanwhile, the number of animals slaughtered also decreased by 21% over the same period. As it stands, almost 95% of herds in Wales are currently free from bTB, under a 14 year programme which focused on reducing cattle-cattle transmission as opposed to culling badgers. While demonstrable progress has been – and is being – made, we agree that more could be done to accelerate Wales’ ambition to be Officially TB Free (OTF). As such, we are calling for farmers to be better supported by the new Welsh Government to take more cost-effective measures such as improved testing – for routine surveillance, as well as pre and post-movement, restricted herd movement, safer trading and enhanced farm biosecurity.
More than half of England’s last estimated badger population was culled in England between 2013 and 2025, with figures from Defra demonstrating that costs associated with culling cost the public purse more than £23.7 million between 2014-2024. Despite this, bTB persists across the border. Due to the failure of badger culling to control the disease, the UK Government confirmed its intention to move away from culling in 2024, and we have since seen an end to 13 years of intensive culling. The UK Government’s change in policy is in line with fulfilling its ambition for England to be Officially TB Free (OTF) by 2038. This in itself signals an acknowledgement that lethal badger control is not needed to achieve bTB eradication.
As Billie Jade says with Wales being home to around 61,000 badgers, if the Welsh Government undertakes a similar trajectory to England’s previous approach in the coming years, thousands of these animals will be killed. However, it is likely that bTB will continue to persist, if we are to learn anything from England’s experience.
None of the experts or the groups set up by the Welsh Government, the Bovine TB Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for Wales and the Bovine TB Eradication Programme Board are advocating a cull. Any changes in Wales’ policy on controlling bTB that involves badger culling have the potential to lead to thousands of animals being killed unnecessarily, without eradicating the disease. Let's hope the new Minister listens.
Monday, July 06, 2026
Farage and the gifts from crypto entrepreneur convicted of fraud
The paper says that Reform MP, Robert Jenrick has admitted that the his leader had accepted staff, security and accommodation from George Cottrell, but claimed they were personal gifts provided before he became an MP and so did not need to be declared:
Jenrick’s comments came after the Sunday Times revealed Cottrell, who was convicted of wire fraud in the US, had hired social media staff for Farage and allowed him to stay in his townhouse near Buckingham Palace.
Asked by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg whether Cottrell paid for staff to run Farage’s social media presence in 2024, Jenrick said: “Yes, absolutely.”
But he added: “You’re allowed to accept a gift, support, whatever you want to call it, from a personal friend before you’re a member of parliament, if it’s in a purely personal capacity.
“When you’re a news presenter and you’ve just been on the jungle [in the TV programme I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out of Here!], you do create social media content that’s nothing to do with his job as a member of parliament, because he wasn’t a member of parliament.”
Jenrick also acknowledged Farage stayed in Cottrell’s house “a couple of times” and accepted private security paid for by him. “Reform have been completely open about this,” he said.
The revelations add to questions about how Farage has financed his lifestyle before and since becoming an MP.
The Guardian revealed earlier this year that the Reform leader had failed to declare a £5m donation from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne just before he announced his intention to stand for parliament.
Parliamentary rules say that MPs must declare gifts, benefits and hospitality received in the year preceding their election if they could in any way relate to their political activities. There is an exemption, however, for gifts which are provided in a purely personal capacity.
The Liberal Democrats have now written to the parliamentary standards commissioner, who is already investigating the Harborne money, asking him to look into the gifts provided by Cottrell too.
Whether these dodgy connections and obsession with accumulating wealth has any impact on Reform UK's polling has to be seen, but in my view the man is not fit to hold public office.
Sunday, July 05, 2026
Not in our name
The paper says that the plan to attach the flags to brackets on about 180 lamp-posts and other places was agreed in the autumn by Nottinghamshire’s council, won by Nigel Farage’s party in last year’s May elections.
They add that a report by the authority justified the £75,000 cost as a way to “enhance civic pride”, saying the national flag was “seen as embodying national unity and the collective values of all the peoples and communities of the United Kingdom”. This did not go down well with local people:
After some criticism of the scheme and its cost, in December last year Lee Anderson, the Reform MP whose Ashfield seat is in the county and who is close to the council’s leader, Mick Barton, posted a video to social media.
Filming himself in Ashfield at one of the flag sites, along with Barton and James Walker-Gurley, another Nottinghamshire council cabinet member, Anderson said: “There’s been a few people moaning about these in … the usual third-rate media outlets, saying it’s cost £75,000 and it’s a waste of taxpayers’ money.”
He went on: “Let me tell you: yes, it has cost £75,000 to put these up all throughout Nottinghamshire, but the good news is, it will not cost the taxpayer a single penny because we want to get these sponsored by local businesses.
“They’re going to pay for the fitting, the upkeep and the maintenance. And guess what: we’re actually going to make a profit on these … The people who are spouting this nonsense about its costing us a fortune – it’s not costing you a single penny.”
A Nottinghamshire council spokesperson said that, seven months later, no sponsors had been found, with the council paying for the scheme.
The council has also attracted other controversy since Reform took control, notably a row over its ban on speaking to journalists from the area’s biggest local newspaper, which ended only after a threat of legal action.
So much for Reform UK being the party that was going to transform local government.
Saturday, July 04, 2026
Pontywood
Broadway theatre and musical star Ivor Emmanuel, who was also in Zulu, was born in the village as was international opera singer Rebecca Evans, and singer and songwriter Geraint Griffiths who played in Welsh language bands Hergest and Edward H Dafis. The Richard Burton Appreciation Society is also based there.
Now, as Wales-on-line reports, the village has its own version of the iconic Hollywood sign. It is the work of "mature undercover handymen" in the Afan Valley village, who wish to remain anonymous, as part of their work to brighten up the area, which also involves hanging bunting, strimming vegetation, erecting gazebos, and helping at community events.
The paper says that the sign is best seen from the village's aqueduct and featured in last year's film Mr Burton starring Toby Jones.
But that is not all. Another article in Wales-on-line reveals that a striking new mural has been unveiled celebrating Ivor Emmanuel. The beloved musical theatre performer, television star, singer and actor is probably best remembered for his role as Private Owen in the 1964 film Zulu.
The new mural has been painted on the side of The Colliers Arms pub and shows him wearing the famous red tunic he wore in the blockbuster with an inscription alongside which reads: "Men of Harlech stop your dreaming, can't you see their spear points gleaming. See their warriors' pennants streaming to this battlefield."
Wrexham was of course the first Welsh place to install its own 'Hollywood' sign, but that city cannot boast the richness of talent associated with Pontrhydyfen, and their sign has since been dismantled.
Wrexham was of course the first Welsh place to install its own 'Hollywood' sign, but that city cannot boast the richness of talent associated with Pontrhydyfen, and their sign has since been dismantled.
Labels: lochist
Friday, July 03, 2026
Farage in trouble again?
The paper tells us that the Reform UK leader has said his party’s major donor, Christopher Harborne, wanted nothing in exchange for the £15m he donated to the party and the undeclared £5m gift to Farage the Guardian revealed in April.
But, Farage used a private meeting at the Bank to urge its governor, Andrew Bailey, to drop plans for a state-run alternative to the digital currency that has made Harborne, his Thailand-based benefactor, one of the richest people in the world:
As reported by the Guardian last month, Farage told October’s Zebu Live event in London he regarded the Bank’s plans for a digital pound with “total and utter horror”. He recounted the meeting at Threadneedle Street with Bailey. “I asked him straight: ‘Are you still progressing your plans for a British central bank digital currency?’ And the answer was: ‘Yes.’”
His opposition to the “Britcoin” proposal was so strong that, after the meeting last September, he told the Zebu audience of crypto enthusiasts he would be “prepared to go to prison” to stop it.
The Labour MP Phil Brickell, chair of the parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, has now reported Farage’s actions to the standards commissioner, asking him to look into the Reform leader’s interactions with the Bank of England.
The standards commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, is already investigating whether Farage should have declared the £5m gift from Harborne, which he received in the months before he returned to parliament.
However, Brickell said this was a separate matter relating to the parliamentary lobbying rules, which are designed to stop MPs making approaches to public officials or ministers on behalf of companies or individuals that pay them.
Speaking to the Guardian, Brickell said: “Farage took a £5m gift from Christopher Harborne – we know that. We also know that he has since used his platform, both publicly and privately, to advance positions that could benefit Mr Harborne’s crypto interests.
“Before meeting the governor of the Bank of England, Farage openly championed Tether, criticised proposed restrictions on stablecoins and vowed to challenge the Bank’s approach. He has since claimed credit for persuading the Bank to soften its position.”
He added: “This is not simply a debate about cryptocurrency. It is about whether an MP who has received millions from one individual should be lobbying for policies that could increase the value and profitability of that [Reform] donor’s investments. Mr Harborne is a major investor in Tether, a company that stood to gain from the weakening of stablecoin restrictions. Harborne also stood to benefit from opposition to a state-backed digital currency that could compete with private stablecoins."
The BBC reports that US President Donald Trump made more than $1.4bn (£1.05bn) last year from business dealings in cryptocurrency, according to his mandatory financial report. In the UK, there are much stricter rules about what politicians can and cannot do in public office.
As reported by the Guardian last month, Farage told October’s Zebu Live event in London he regarded the Bank’s plans for a digital pound with “total and utter horror”. He recounted the meeting at Threadneedle Street with Bailey. “I asked him straight: ‘Are you still progressing your plans for a British central bank digital currency?’ And the answer was: ‘Yes.’”
His opposition to the “Britcoin” proposal was so strong that, after the meeting last September, he told the Zebu audience of crypto enthusiasts he would be “prepared to go to prison” to stop it.
The Labour MP Phil Brickell, chair of the parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, has now reported Farage’s actions to the standards commissioner, asking him to look into the Reform leader’s interactions with the Bank of England.
The standards commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, is already investigating whether Farage should have declared the £5m gift from Harborne, which he received in the months before he returned to parliament.
However, Brickell said this was a separate matter relating to the parliamentary lobbying rules, which are designed to stop MPs making approaches to public officials or ministers on behalf of companies or individuals that pay them.
Speaking to the Guardian, Brickell said: “Farage took a £5m gift from Christopher Harborne – we know that. We also know that he has since used his platform, both publicly and privately, to advance positions that could benefit Mr Harborne’s crypto interests.
“Before meeting the governor of the Bank of England, Farage openly championed Tether, criticised proposed restrictions on stablecoins and vowed to challenge the Bank’s approach. He has since claimed credit for persuading the Bank to soften its position.”
He added: “This is not simply a debate about cryptocurrency. It is about whether an MP who has received millions from one individual should be lobbying for policies that could increase the value and profitability of that [Reform] donor’s investments. Mr Harborne is a major investor in Tether, a company that stood to gain from the weakening of stablecoin restrictions. Harborne also stood to benefit from opposition to a state-backed digital currency that could compete with private stablecoins."
The BBC reports that US President Donald Trump made more than $1.4bn (£1.05bn) last year from business dealings in cryptocurrency, according to his mandatory financial report. In the UK, there are much stricter rules about what politicians can and cannot do in public office.
Thursday, July 02, 2026
Calling out the anti-asylum seeker nonsense
The news site says that in a video posted on TikTok by Kiera Marshall she said it was “time to call bullshit” on disinformation and myths circulating about asylum seekers and refugees living in Wales:
The MS listed a number claims made about people seeking sanctuary which she said were false.
Speaking in her social video, Ms Marshall explained that refugees and asylum seekers do not get priority access to the NHS.
“Yes they get free health care, but they are not prioritised over British tax-payers,” she said.
The newly elected Plaid MS also explained that people seeking sanctuary are not eligible for council housing or social housing while their claim is being processed.
Defending the Welsh Government’s Nation of Sanctuary policy, she said that over the past six years less than 0.05% of Wales’ budget had been spent on the scheme.
Reform want to abolish the scheme because the party views it as a “left-wing experiment” that encourages illegal immigration.
The Welsh Government does not control borders or immigration as these are reserved powers handled solely by the UK Government and the Home Office.
The Nation of Sanctuary policy focuses on supporting asylum seekers and refugees by helping them access public services, housing, language lessons, and health care once they are place in Wales by the Home Office.
91% of the £55m spent on the Nation of Sanctuary scheme over six years has gone towards resettling refugees from Ukraine.
Ms Marshall said: “The real issue here isn’t immigration, it’s inequality and its time we stopped blaming people for fleeing wars and conflict and started blaming billionaires and the super rich.”
Will Hayward in his newsletter goes into more detail. He points out that there are 3,308 people awaiting a decision on an asylum application living in Wales, according to the most recent figures released for May 2026, which is fewer than 4% of the 94,000 people seeking refuge who are dispersed around the wider United Kingdom - well below Wales’ population share:
Someone arriving in a country claiming to need sanctuary from war or persecution is legally defined as “seeking asylum”.
People with that status are not allowed to work, so the Home Office provides a very small amount of money to cover the very basic needs of survival and they are given accommodation.
The individual or family doesn’t decide where they are placed, they’re sent wherever there is capacity and the decision is made by the Home Office. That may be Wales, but it could equally be anywhere from Cornwall to Glasgow.
The basic payment is £49.18 a week per person. £7 a day.
That’s to cover everything including food, toiletries, non-prescription medication, clothing, footwear, travel and anything else we might consider a basic need like a mobile phone or access to the internet.
In rare cases, the initial accommodation provides meals in which case the amount of money a person gets will drop to £9.95 a week. If you’re a pregnant mother, or have a child aged one to three, you get an extra £5.25 a week. If you have a baby under one you are given an extra £9.50 a week.
It is difficult to comprehend how little that money is to live on in Wales in 2026.
Importantly, Will Hayward explains that terminology really matters in this debate:
The term “illegal immigrant” isn’t recognised in immigration law and is widely agreed to be a dehumanising way to reference a person.
A person’s immigration status could be unlawful, but a person themselves cannot be “illegal”.
The only way to claim asylum in the UK is to do so once you’re already here. There is no “asylum visa” you can pre-arrange.
That means some people have to travel to the UK through what’s known as an “irregular route” – that might be a channel crossing on a boat. The only other way is to travel to the UK with one type of visa (like a student visa for example). Once in the UK, they can declare themselves to an immigration official and then they are protected by humanitarian law.
If a person has their asylum claim rejected, then they have “no legal right to remain” and they become liable for removal from the country (if their appeal process is exhausted).
There is a lot of misinformation on this subject, it is important to have the facts.
Wednesday, July 01, 2026
Another Farage payday
The paper says that the Reform UK leader has been criticised in the past over his £400,000-a-year second job promoting the idea for Direct Bullion that people should buy physical gold and put it in their pension pots. This latest payment is double his fee from 2025, was received in May and appears in Farage’s latest entry in parliament’s register of interests, published on Tuesday:
Anna Turley, the Labour party chair, said: “He pretends to be on the side of ordinary working people but in truth he’s just in it for himself and will sell his time to the highest bidder.
“He should be focused on putting more pounds back in his Clacton constituents’ pockets rather than racking up payments off the back of gold sales.”
The Reform leader continues to face pressure over a separate £5m gift from Christopher Harborne, the Thailand-based crypto investor who has given millions of pounds to the party.
Farage has said the payment, which the Guardian revealed in April, was a gift and so did not need to be registered under rules requiring MPs to declare any potential interests in the 12 months before their election.
However, he is facing a formal investigation by the parliamentary standards watchdog. He has given a number of different accounts as to why he received the money, first saying it was intended for personal security costs and then that it was a reward for Brexit.
Asked about the payment, which corresponds to an hourly rate of £22,500, a Reform spokesperson said: “As has previously been reported and declared Nigel Farage is a brand ambassador for Direct Bullion.”
Farage received £91,200 from the company for four hours’ work in January 2025 and £135,000 nine months later for an estimated 12 hours of work over three months.
The latest register of interests also records that he received £18,402 for about six hours of presenting for GB News in June. Other declared work includes speaking engagements for Imperial Independent Media, a US-based consulting firm, and social media work for Google and X.
Nice work if you can get it.
Tuesday, June 30, 2026
A radical agenda but can Burnham deliver?
The Guardian reports that Andy Burnham plans to set up No 10 North as the “nerve centre of a rewired Britain” to oversee a devolution of power and resources across the UK that he said would deliver the change the country desperately needed.
The paper quotes our so-called prime minister-in-waiting as arguing that the Westminster system is “broken” and that a “more of the same” approach would neither improve living standards or restore people’s faith in how politics worked for them. No argument there:
In his first speech since Keir Starmer announced he was standing down, Burnham repeatedly returned to the theme of a decade of “change” but also set out concrete policies to transform how the country works, beginning with overcoming Whitehall’s resistance to change.
No 10 North would have three “clear tasks” for devolution: to increase public ownership of essential utilities such as water, energy and housing; reindustrialise swathes of the country; and regenerate towns, prioritising places that had been left behind.
This would include overseeing the biggest council housebuilding programme since the postwar period, he said, as well as ordering Whitehall to back British firms bidding for public contracts – even if this cost taxpayers more.
However, Burnham acknowledged that “people can’t wait for ever for change”, as he hinted at an early cost of living support package once he made it to Downing Street. “I heard on doorsteps in Makerfield how people need a bit extra now to help with rising costs,” he said.
“I will do my very best to deliver it, and whilst not taking risks with the public finances, will seek to give Britain some breathing space as soon as I can. People need to be able to look forward to a night out or a holiday with the kids. People need hope.”
This is a very ambitious programme and he has less than three years to deliver it. In doing so he will have to overcome institutional inertia within Whitehall, and find the money to fund his policies.
I don't doubt his determination or his sincerity, but we have yet to see whether he has the cojones and the ability to overome the obstacles that will be put in his path.
Monday, June 29, 2026
Are we doing enough to insure against climate change?
This is not a question of people just getting on with it. People and animals hae died as a result of the heat, while there is a clear knock-on effect for day-to-day life, with schools closing early, and businesses struggling to remain productive.
The economic impact of climate change is addressed in this Guardian article, which suggests that government will need to take more active role to protect consumers.
The paper says that in a pair of well-timed interventions from the finance lobby group TheCityUK and Swati Dhingra, the economist and independent member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee, made the point powerfully last week that the economic effects of the climate crisis for the UK are not confined to the many hours lost to quietly perspiring:
TheCityUK’s report, written with the insurer Marsh, focused on the mounting challenge of insuring homeowners and businesses against the costs of extreme weather events.
With such events, including wildfires and floods, happening increasingly frequently and with growing severity, it argues that the risk of damage is becoming more difficult for insurers to price and warns of growing “protection gaps”.
It said: “Traditional actuarial methods – the basis for insurance pricing – assume the underlying probability of loss is broadly stable year to year. That assumption is becoming less reliable as climate hazards intensify, undermining the confidence with which insurers model expected future losses.”
That’s a tragedy for those affected, whose homes and livelihoods are left uninsured in the face of natural disasters.
But because of the important role of insurance in oiling the wheels of investment, TheCityUK argues that the difficulties of pricing climate risk will also have knock-on effects across the financial system. It is, they say, “not simply a sectoral issue, but a foundational concern for bankability, investability, and orderly economic activity”.
Of course, a financial lobby group has an interest in alerting us to the travails of the insurance sector, for which few are likely to shed a tear.
But they are right to warn that the unpredictability and severity of weather events is likely to be increasingly felt more widely.
And they say that could create a vicious cycle, in which too little is spent on adapting to climate risks, which increases the cost of climate damage and, in turn, raises the cost of investment, as insurers and lenders recoup their losses.
The report argues there is more that could be done by the private sector, for example, in developing ways to account for climate resilience in insurance. But it suggests there may also have to be more public – or partly public – backstops. Dhingra’s speech points to another related vicious cycle. She highlights the increasing impact of adverse weather events worldwide, such as drought or excessive rainfall, on UK inflation. As just one example, she says: “Chocolate alone contributed roughly 1 percentage point to UK food inflation in 2025, reflecting a surge in cocoa prices driven largely by extreme heat in west Africa and the fact that chocolate accounts for close to 6% of the UK food basket.”
In fact, further evidence for the impact of severe weather in our shopping baskets came in an analysis last week from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, which found that 13% of UK food imports last year came from countries that are the least climate resilient, yet most exposed to extreme weather.
These imports included rice from India, soft and citrus fruits from South Africa, Peru and Egypt, coffee from Vietnam and Brazil, Colombian and Ecuadorian bananas and Kenyan tea.
A few pence on the price of a bar of chocolate or a bunch of bananas is a minor inconvenience compared with the punishing conditions endured by workers in these countries. The ECIU calculates that agricultural labourers across the 15 most climate-vulnerable countries lost 216bn hours to heat stress in 2024.
But when the ripples reach the UK in the form of higher prices, the Bank’s MPC is at the forefront of the policy response. Yet, as Dhingra points out, raising interest rates to offset the inflationary impacts of the climate crisis also increases the cost of borrowing to make much-needed investments in the transition to net zero and climate adaptation.
Similarly, using higher rates to constrain the inflationary effects of rocketing energy prices resulting from geopolitical chaos – most recently the Iran war – could raise the cost of investing in the renewable alternatives that would help to insulate the UK from such chaos.
Her argument is that monetary policy – interest rates, in other words – and government tax and spend policies may have to work more closely to break that cycle.
This is the challenge that Burnham will face if he becomes Prime Minister. We will see if he is up to it, or even if it is actually manageable.
Sunday, June 28, 2026
A power vacuum?
The paper says that for all Keir Starmer’s call for unity, the rancour is everywhere, Burnham is now inevitable: he will become prime minister on July 20, the day after the World Cup final:
The scale of his win in the Makerfield by-election, where he crushed Reform UK and won more than 50 per cent of the vote, was enough to make the case for him. It was ultimately a bloodless coup, but for Starmer loyalists it is still a bitter pill to swallow.
“We’ve passed the two most left-wing budgets in more than half a century, then bled votes to the Greens,” one senior Labour source said. “We should probably reflect about why that is before lurching off to the left again.”
Burnham finds himself attempting to build a fully fledged policy platform and a cabinet in the space of three and a half weeks, which allies have compared to attempting to build a plane mid-flight. It is no small task and unsurprisingly has left something of a vacuum.
The Labour Party is in a state of suspended animation where everyone’s political future, barring Starmer’s, lies in the balance.
In the bars of Westminster this week there has been a heady mix of fear, hope, anger and elation, depending on who you talk to. Some have descended into all-out civil war.
The battle to become Burnham’s chancellor has turned into an increasingly vitriolic briefing war as Ed Miliband’s critics do everything they can to stop him entering No 11.
Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, is attempting to sack her migration minister for writing an unauthorised article in The Times about Labour’s migration policy. Starmer won’t let her.
Meanwhile, the beleaguered defence spending plan is finally about to see the light of day next week as Starmer seeks to secure at least one part of legacy. Senior Labour figures and defence chiefs remain seriously concerned it is not enough.
The paper adds that there are likely to be big jobs for Burnham’s most senior allies: Josh Simons, who made way for him to stand in Makerfield, Louise Haigh, the former transport secretary, and the MP Anneliese Midgley.
However, they add that almost the entire cabinet is in the dark about their futures, with particular uncertainty around the role of chancellor, as Burnham’s allies are clear that Rachel Reeves will not stay in the role. It is expected to come down to a two-horse race between Miliband, the energy secretary, and Shabana Mahmood.
In the meantime, it is almost as if the process of government is on ice.
