Friday, September 12, 2025
Mandelson sacked, but why was he appointed in the first place?
There was a certain inevitability about Peter Mandelson being sacked from his role as UK ambassador to the US following mounting pressure over his newly revealed links to convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Independent reports that the sacking came after it was revealed that Mandelson had maintained ties with Epstein after the disgraced former banker was jailed for a child sex offence:
Responding to an urgent question in the House of Commons, foreign minister Stephen Doughty said Lord Mandelson had been sacked after leaked emails showed that his relationship with Epstein, who died in 2019, was “materially different from that known at the time of his appointment” as UK ambassador to the US last year.
The Tories said it showed an “extraordinary error of judgement by this prime minister” and that it raised “massive questions” about what he knew about the pair’s relationship and when.
Announcing Lord Mandelson’s sacking, Mr Doughty said: “In light of additional information in the emails written by Peter Mandelson, the prime minister has asked the foreign secretary to withdraw him as ambassador to the United States.
“The emails show that the depth and extent of Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment. In particular, Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information.”
While there were cheers at the news in the Commons, Tory shadow minister Neil O’Brien was not satisfied with the explanation after prime minister Sir Keir Starmer made a robust defence of Lord Mandelson just 24 hours ago.
He said: “This is yet another extraordinary error of judgement by this prime minister. It raises massive questions.
“It is not just that Peter Mandelson said that Epstein was his best pal and that he loved him. It wasn’t just that he brokered a deal for him while he was business secretary. We now, of course, know that he was working for Epstein’s early release after he was convicted.
“And the simple question is this: is the minister now saying that the prime minister did not know about any of this at the point where [Lord Mandelson] was appointed? What did the prime minister know at the point of his appointment?”
The paper adds that while Lord Mandelson has insisted he regrets ever having met Epstein, an investigation by The Telegraph has detailed a two-decade friendship between the pair, which continued even after Epstein was jailed for a child sex offence in 2008:
Its report includes claims that Epstein brokered a deal involving the then Mr Mandelson, who was the Labour business secretary at the time, in relation to the sale of a taxpayer-owned business, after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences.
Mandelson was a controversial appointment in the first place, he had resigned in disgrace twice before, had a longstanding relationship with Epstein and widespread, complicated, and opaque commercial interests. He was a significant reputational risk.
In retrospect, making him our ambassador to the US was a huge risk, and must bring into question Starmer's judgement. What did he know and when did he know it? Why did he go ahead with this appointment?
The Independent reports that the sacking came after it was revealed that Mandelson had maintained ties with Epstein after the disgraced former banker was jailed for a child sex offence:
Responding to an urgent question in the House of Commons, foreign minister Stephen Doughty said Lord Mandelson had been sacked after leaked emails showed that his relationship with Epstein, who died in 2019, was “materially different from that known at the time of his appointment” as UK ambassador to the US last year.
The Tories said it showed an “extraordinary error of judgement by this prime minister” and that it raised “massive questions” about what he knew about the pair’s relationship and when.
Announcing Lord Mandelson’s sacking, Mr Doughty said: “In light of additional information in the emails written by Peter Mandelson, the prime minister has asked the foreign secretary to withdraw him as ambassador to the United States.
“The emails show that the depth and extent of Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment. In particular, Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information.”
While there were cheers at the news in the Commons, Tory shadow minister Neil O’Brien was not satisfied with the explanation after prime minister Sir Keir Starmer made a robust defence of Lord Mandelson just 24 hours ago.
He said: “This is yet another extraordinary error of judgement by this prime minister. It raises massive questions.
“It is not just that Peter Mandelson said that Epstein was his best pal and that he loved him. It wasn’t just that he brokered a deal for him while he was business secretary. We now, of course, know that he was working for Epstein’s early release after he was convicted.
“And the simple question is this: is the minister now saying that the prime minister did not know about any of this at the point where [Lord Mandelson] was appointed? What did the prime minister know at the point of his appointment?”
The paper adds that while Lord Mandelson has insisted he regrets ever having met Epstein, an investigation by The Telegraph has detailed a two-decade friendship between the pair, which continued even after Epstein was jailed for a child sex offence in 2008:
Its report includes claims that Epstein brokered a deal involving the then Mr Mandelson, who was the Labour business secretary at the time, in relation to the sale of a taxpayer-owned business, after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences.
Mandelson was a controversial appointment in the first place, he had resigned in disgrace twice before, had a longstanding relationship with Epstein and widespread, complicated, and opaque commercial interests. He was a significant reputational risk.
In retrospect, making him our ambassador to the US was a huge risk, and must bring into question Starmer's judgement. What did he know and when did he know it? Why did he go ahead with this appointment?
Thursday, September 11, 2025
Tory donations under question
The paper say that more than 40 donations to the Tories over 23 years have been registered in the name of Rosemary Saïd, a British woman, but leaked documents marked “official – sensitive” renew long-running questions about whether it is her husband, the billionaire businessman Wafic Saïd, who is the real source of the money even though he is barred by electoral law from donating:
One of the documents, an official government log from Boris Johnson’s time in Downing Street, contains the entry: “Political meeting with Wafic Said (donor) and Rosemary Said.”
Wafic also had two separate phone calls with Johnson and senior aides without his wife, according to other logs.
A Canadian citizen resident in Monaco, Wafic, 85, is barred by law from donating because he is not eligible to vote in the UK. Rosemary, 79, is allowed to give money and the Conservative party has declared donations in her name between 2001 and 2024. Johnson declared a £10,000 contribution from her during his leadership campaign.
When contacted for comment, Wafic Saïd said: “My wife is an independently wealthy woman who has been a strong supporter of the Conservative party her entire life.”
He added: “I have not made donations to the Conservative party for at least 25 years, and any suggestion otherwise would be clearly untrue and would be a very serious matter for me, as I always respect the law.”
Whatever the truth, we have yet another news story on donations. It is time to address the inadquacy of electoral law in allowing large donations and associated questions around influence.
Tuesday, September 09, 2025
Boris Johnson raking in the money
The paper says that the Boris Files contain emails, letters, invoices, speeches and business contracts, which shine a spotlight on the inner workings of a publicly subsidised company Johnson established after leaving Downing Street in September 2022:
The trove reveals how Johnson has used the company to manage an array of highly paid jobs and business ventures. They raise questions for the former Conservative leader about whether he has breached “revolving door” rules governing post-ministerial careers.
The revelations have echoes of the Greensill Capital lobbying scandal that embroiled one of Johnson’s predecessors, David Cameron. They may also spark questions about the taxpayer-funded allowance that former prime ministers get to run their private offices.
There are more than 1,800 files in the cache, including some that date back to Johnson’s tenure in Downing Street. The Guardian is the only UK media organisation known to have viewed the trove.
The files reveal:
* Johnson lobbied a senior Saudi official he had met while in office, asking him to share a pitch with the petrostate’s autocratic crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, for a firm he co-chairs.
* The ex-PM received more than £200,000 from a hedge fund after meeting Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro – contrary to statements he was not paid.
* While in office, Johnson appears to have held a secret meeting with Peter Thiel, the billionaire who founded the controversial US data firm Palantir, months before it was given a role managing NHS data.
* In an apparent breach of Covid pandemic rules, Johnson hosted a dinner for a Tory peer who financed a lavish refurbishment of his Downing Street flat, a day after the second national Covid-19 lockdown came into force.
Johnson did not respond to multiple requests for comment. After publication, Johnson emailed a statement to the Guardian denying his office had misused a subsidy scheme intended to support an ex-PM’s public duties. The public duty costs allowance (PDCA) should not be used for private or commercial purposes.
The paper says that the files raise questions about whether Johnson has blurred these lines while running the Office of Boris Johnson, a limited company established a month after he left Downing Street and funded by an annual six-figure sum from the taxpayer:
A senior Cabinet Office source confirmed that Johnson has claimed funds under the scheme to pay for staff salaries in his private office. Official data shows he has claimed £182,000 in PDCA payments since leaving government.
Johnson’s office, the leak reveals, has played a central role in managing his commercial endeavours. These include deals with Daily Mail and GB News, and a globe-trotting career giving speeches for deep-pocketed clients.
The cache of files suggest that between October 2022 and May 2024, Johnson was paid approximately £5.1m for 34 speeches. The engagements typically earn him hundreds of thousands of pounds, as well as generous expenses to cover first-class flights and stays in five-star hotels for him and his staff.
It is not unusual or against any rules for former prime ministers to travel the world delivering paid speeches, but there are restrictions on business activities they can undertake after leaving government.
These include prohibitions on lobbying contacts developed while in office in foreign governments and commercial organisations. Johnson was reminded of these rules by an official watchdog on the day he left Downing Street.
Revelations from the Boris Files will place pressure on Johnson to explain how some of his recent contacts with foreign governments on behalf of commercial interest fall within the rules.
There are many questions for Boris Johnson arising from these files. I'm just not expecting him to answer them.
Brexit to hit tourists from next month
The paper says that as a result there will be long delays for British travellers getting into Europe as a result of the new post-Brexit checks:
New Entry/Exit System (EES) measures at the EU borders mean people have to have their fingerprints and photograph taken as well as scanning passports. The move, replacing passport stamping, will come into effect from October 12 for UK and non-EU nationals travelling for a short stay.
A UK government spokesperson said: “While EES checks will be a significant change to the EU border, we are in constant and close dialogue with our European partners to try and minimise the impact on the British public.
“While we have done everything we can to ensure the required infrastructure is in place, anyone who is planning a trip to the European mainland once these checks are introduced will still need to allow more time for their journey as the new EU systems bed in."
EES will be a requirement when entering Schengen area countries including Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. But it will not be required when travelling to Ireland and Cyprus.
It means Brits will have to register on their first visit to a participating country after EES is introduced. Each registration will be valid for a rolling three-year period, or until the passport expires.
All travellers, including babies, will be photographed - but children under 12 will not have to give their fingerprints. Digital records will be created for everyone who goes through the process.
People will need to scan their passports and provide either their fingerprints or a photo at the border. EES is being phased in by European countries over six months - meaning some airports, ports and train terminals will have different requirements until April next year.
For travellers using the Port of Dover, Eurotunnel at Folkestone or Eurostar at St Pancras International, the process will take place at the border before they leave the UK.
The Government has ploughed £10.5million of funding to help pay for the new scanners and equipment needed for checks.
The EU believes the EES system will help track people who enter using the 90-day visa-free travel rule. British citizens covered by Withdrawal Agreement residence
The Government said: "Whilst checks should only take 1-2 minutes for each person, they may lead to longer wait times at Border Control upon arrival in the Schengen area. At the juxtaposed ports, where checks are completed in the UK, prior to departure, there may be longer waits at busy times. Eurotunnel, Eurostar and the Port of Dover have plans in place to minimise disruption as much as possible."
It has taken time, but this is when leaving the EU gets real for many holidaymakers.
Monday, September 08, 2025
Is Starmer listening?
The paper says that with Nigel Farage comfortably leading in the polls, Dame Emily Thornberry and Andy Burnham said the PM must listen more to his backbenchers to stop Reform UK from winning the next general election:
Dame Emily said she was considering running for the deputy leadership after Angela Rayner was forced to resign over her failure to pay £40,000 in stamp duty on the purchase of a flat in Hove.
And she said Labour faces “the fight of our lives” at the next election against Mr Farage. “The last thing we want is to go from a position where we thought we would be in for two terms, to hand our country over to Farage,” she told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.
She said Sir Keir has restored Britain’s status on the world stage and praised domestic reforms including the strengthening of workers’ rights. “But nobody seems to be hearing about that,” she warned. “They hear about the mistakes, and the question is, why are we making these mistakes?” she added.
Asked why, she said: “I think it's not listening to people of goodwill who want the party to succeed. I think we need to do more of that, because I think that the answers are out there, but I think that we need to continue to listen and learn from the public.”
Meanwhile Mr Burnham, one of Labour’s most powerful figures outside of Westminster, said that Labour MPs must be respected more going forward. “That is the debate we should have during the deputy leadership contest,” he said. “I would say more broadly that it also needs to be a bit of a reset for the government,” he added.
Mr Burnham said he was “concerned about the balance” of Sir Keir’s cabinet following the weekend’s emergency reshuffle, and that “we need to use the contest to discuss some of those things”.
He said: “It is right to have a discussion about the internal management of the Labour Party. And in a time where the scale and the nature of the challenge we face is such as it is, you need everybody pulling together, all parts of the party pulling together.
“And that points to a party management style that is less factional and more pluralistic. Labour MPs need to listen to them more and respect them more.”
Both Thornberry and Burnham are right that the Labour leadership are not very good at listening. This is an election that the prime minister doesn't need.
The fact that senior members are already using the contest to raise concerns about Starmer's leadership suggests that the election of a new deputy leader could well get spicy, and leave the PM with a headache if the 'wrong' candidate is elected.
Sunday, September 07, 2025
Farage plays system to minimise his tax burden
The Guardian, at least, have started to focus in on the issue. They reveal that the Reform leader is using a private company to reduce his tax bill on his GB News media appearances and other outside employment in a television star-style arrangement that has in recent years become frowned on by major broadcasters.
The effect of this is that Farage diverts money from his prime-time TV show into his company, which means that he paid only 25% corporation tax on profits, instead of 40% income tax, and could offset some expenses:
The Clacton MP, who is also paid a £94,000-a-year MP’s salary, has in the past criticised people who try to avoid tax as the “common enemy” and has previously come under fire for setting up a trust fund in an offshore tax haven.
He has also claimed that some tax avoidance schemes were acceptable. “Most forms of legal tax avoidance are OK, but clearly some are not,” he said in 2014, adding that nobody voluntarily paid anything to HMRC while defending reducing a tax bill within the law.
Farage claimed last year to have “bought a house” in his constituency, but the property is actually owned in the name of his partner, meaning he legally avoided higher-rate stamp duty on the purchase of an additional home – given that he already owns other properties.
The use of personal service companies is not illegal, but it has been criticised across the political spectrum as a way to reduce tax bills. Farage has declined to publish his tax returns for 2023/24.
Several broadcasters including the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 have cracked down on the practice in recent years. HMRC has repeatedly tightened the rules around off-payroll working (IR35) to stop this kind of tax avoidance.
The parliamentary register of interests shows that Farage has made nearly £400,000 from GB News since August 2024, for about 190 hours’ work. This suggests he is being paid more than £2,000 an hour by the news channel.
All payments for his GB News work are paid directly to his company, Thorn in the Side Ltd, of which he is the director and only shareholder. He has other paid roles including as a brand ambassador for gold bullion firms, speaking on the international circuit, and a Daily Telegraph column.
The latest accounts show that as of 31 May 2024, the company had £1.7m in cash, up over £1m in a year. It also owns two investment properties.
As Farage’s profile has soared with the rise of Reform UK, so has the value of the company, which is now worth £2.6m, up £2m from 2021.
Having just returned from talking the UK down in another country and encouraging President Trump to disrupt our trade by imposing tariffs, Farage is once more demonstrating that he couldn't be further removed from the man in the street when it comes to his background and lifestyle.
Saturday, September 06, 2025
Captain Robert Falcon Scott's link to Swansea
As Swansea Council's website records, Edgar Evans was born in 1876 in Middleton Hall Cottage at Middleton on Gower and brought up nearby:
He lived in Middleton until he was 6 and then the family moved to Swansea. He joined the Royal Navy at 15 and later served under Captain Scott undertaking two expeditions to the Antarctic in the years between 1901 - 03.
He died on 17th February 1912 whilst returning from the South Pole with the Southern Party of the British Antarctic Expedition under the command of Captain Robert Falcon Scott. The latter once described Edgar Evans memorably as ..."a giant worker he is responsible for every sledge, every sledge-fitting, tents, sleeping bags, harness and when one cannot recall a single expression of dissatisfaction with any one of these items, it shows what an invaluable assistant he has been".
His body was never recovered and still rests somewhere near the Beardmore Glacier in Antarctica.
A blue plaque commemorating the explorer has been placed on Middleton Hall Cottage, which is situated just off the road to Rhossili. The cottage is private but the plaque can be viewed from the public footpath. Use What3words reference bowhead.rave.soap.
Friday, September 05, 2025
Are Welsh council tax payers getting a raw deal?
The website says that researchers at Cardiff University’s Wales Governance Centre have concluded that the impact on poorer households in particular makes the current situation unsustainable:
Comparing the increases in Wales with those in England and Scotland, the researchers state: “Looking just at the very recent history of council tax increases, this is the second consecutive year in which Welsh council tax increases exceed those in England, where increases over 5% typically require a local referendum. Wales’ increases this year are below Scotland, where councils raised taxes by an average of 8.8% this year. But taking a longer-term view, the pattern in council tax increases since devolution is much more one-sided and can be starkly and simply shown.
“Since the advent of devolution in 1999, Wales has seen average annual council tax increases of 5%, compared with 4% in England (with increases constrained by caps and referendum requirements since 2010) and 2% in Scotland (due to the Scottish Government’s council tax freeze policy since 2007-08).
“This means that Welsh council tax bills have effectively tripled since devolution, with notably faster increases than England and Scotland since the start of UK austerity measures in 2010. In 2025-26, council tax revenues are now £440m higher than they would have been had they increased in line with England since 2010-11, and £750m higher than if we had followed Scotland’s trajectory of council tax increases. These are serious sums of money in Wales.
“Over the Sixth Senedd term as a whole (2021-22 to 2025-26), council tax revenues will have increased by over £600m – £233m higher than if bill increases had followed Scotland.
“The Welsh Government would have a straightforward explanation for these increases. By allowing higher council tax rises, Wales has avoided council bankruptcies and has kept vital services like adult and children’s social care and ALN (Additional Learning Needs) provision in a stronger state than across the border.
“This extra resource does of course help fund local services. But the problem is that by choosing Council Tax as the vehicle for providing this extra resource, tax increases have hit Welsh households very unequally.
“Unlike income tax, council tax does not tax households based on their income, nor on the current value of their property. Instead, council tax bills are based on the valuation bands which are roughly based on how much a given property was worth in April 2003 (when the last revaluation was undertaken in Wales). There are nine bands, with A representing the lowest value properties and I the highest. But even though they cover every type and size of property imaginable, rates for bands A-C and E-I vary only quite narrowly around the central band D rate, regulated by a Welsh Government-set formula.
The really big issue of course is, as they say, the limited variation around the B and D rate set by the council means households living in Band A-C properties pay a much higher proportion of the value of their house in council tax than households living in a Band H-I property. This heightens the unfairness of the tax.
The next Welsh government needs to get to grips with this problem quickly.
Thursday, September 04, 2025
A ‘Putin-loving free speech imposter’
The Guardian reports that Nigel Farage went to Washington at the invitation of Republicans to testify on what the Reform leader calls the “awful authoritarian” situation for free speech in the UK. as if it's any of their business.(Photograph: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
In other words, he once more neglected to represent his constituents in Parliament so he could go to a foreign country to talk the UK down. However, he got a bit more than he bargained for.
The paper says that during the sometimes difficult appearance before the US congressional hearing on censorship, Farage was accused of being a “Putin-loving free speech impostor” whose main motivation is ingratiating himself with Donald Trump and tech companies.
The Reform UK leader, missed prime minister’s questions to appear as a witness before the House judiciary committee, but he faced openly hostile questioning from Democrat members, who questioned whether he really backed free speech, with one asking why journalists from hostile publications have been banned from Reform events:
In an opening statement, the Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin said that if Farage was, as he said, worried about the implications of the UK’s Online Safety Act, he might have done better to make the case as an MP rather than in the US.
“He should go and advance the positions he’s taking here in Congress today in parliament, which is meeting today, if he’s serious about it,” Raskin said.
“To the people of the UK who think this Putin-loving free speech impostor and Trump sycophant will protect freedom in this country, come on over to America and see what Trump and Maga are doing to destroy our freedom. You might … think twice before you let Mr Farage make Britain great again.”
Some other Democrat members were equally scathing. Jerrold Nadler asked why the committee had sought evidence from “a fringe politician from the United Kingdom”, while another, Hank Johnson, asked Farage to confirm that Reform currently has four MPs.
Johnson accused Farage of advocating for free speech so as to solicit donations from Elon Musk, the owner of X, saying: “You’re trying to ingratiate yourself with the tech bros.” He added: “You need money from Elon Musk in order to get elected prime minister of Great Britain. That’s the bottom line.”
Farage responded by pointing out that Musk did not support him: “Elon Musk is abusive about me virtually every single week, but it’s a free country.”
Raskin asked the Reform leader why he had called for a ban on a pro-Gaza protest, with Farage saying this was because it would have happened close to Remembrance Sunday, calling this a “sensitive” time.
Raskin replied: “I thought that’s what the freedom of speech was about. You have a right to engage in speech that other people consider offensive or insensitive.”
Raskin also asked why Reform often prevents journalists from critical organisations from attending its events. Farage said this did not happen with his knowledge: “If I go back the last 25 years, I can’t think of banning anybody. But I mean, maybe somebody else did.”
Wouldn't it be nice if UK journalists, especially the BBC, dropped the kid gloves and took a similar robust approach to scrutinise Farage and his cronies.
Wednesday, September 03, 2025
No evidence to support claims linking sexual violence with refugees
The Independent reports that leading female politicians, campaigners and cultural figures have signed an open letter criticising attempts from the right to link sexual violence in Britain to the arrival of asylum seekers.
The paper says that the letter - signed by musicians Paloma Faith, Charlotte Church and Anoushka Shankar, as well as Labour, Green and independent MPs including Kim Johnson, Ellie Chowns, Diane Abbott and Zarah Sultana – says they “reject the far right’s racist lies about ‘protecting’ women and girls”:
“They are not defenders of women – they exploit violence against women to fuel hate and division,” reads the letter, coordinated by Stand Up to Racism and titled ‘Women Against the Far Right’.
The letter, seen by The Guardian, warns: “Violence against women and girls is a serious and urgent issue. But it will never be solved by the likes of Nigel Farage and Robert Jenrick targeting refugees, Muslims and migrants.
“There is no evidence that people seeking refuge are more likely to commit acts of sexual violence. Many are themselves survivors of violence, war, and persecution. Blaming them distracts from tackling the deep-rooted causes of abuse and from holding those truly responsible to account.”
It also accuses the far right of spreading misinformation to whip up protests and unrest outside hotels housing asylum seekers, which include women and children. The letter argues that this does nothing to make women in Britain feel safer.
...
Reform UK leader Mr Farage has repeatedly tried to link illegal immigration with levels of violence against women and girls, claiming that an “Afghan male has a 22 times more likely chance of being convicted of rape than somebody born in this country”.
In fact as the Guardian reported a few years ago, the majority of child sexual abuse gangs are made up of white men under the age of 30.
According to an official report, which covers England, Scotland and Wales and summarises a range of studies on the issue of group-based child sexual exploitation (CSE), also known as grooming gangs, there is not enough evidence to conclude that child sexual abuse gangs were disproportionately made up of Asian offenders.
It said: “Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white:
Nazir Afzal, the former chief crown prosecutor in the north-west, who brought prosecutions over the Rochdale grooming gangs, welcomed the report. “It confirms that white men remain the most common offenders, which is something rarely mentioned by rightwing commentators,” he said.
“However, it is not shy in reflecting that south Asian and British Pakistani men are disproportionately found in high-profile cases.
“The danger is that by focusing entirely on the ethnicity of the offender, we miss the bigger picture, which is how the unheard, the left-behind women and girls, are invariably the victims. That’s where the government’s attention and action should be primarily focused.”
The point is that this is not clear cut by any stretch of the imagination, despite the rhetoric being utilised by Farage, Jenrick and their acolytes, misleading rhetoric that has been used to fuel protests and hatred.
Nazir Afzal, the former chief crown prosecutor in the north-west, who brought prosecutions over the Rochdale grooming gangs, welcomed the report. “It confirms that white men remain the most common offenders, which is something rarely mentioned by rightwing commentators,” he said.
“However, it is not shy in reflecting that south Asian and British Pakistani men are disproportionately found in high-profile cases.
“The danger is that by focusing entirely on the ethnicity of the offender, we miss the bigger picture, which is how the unheard, the left-behind women and girls, are invariably the victims. That’s where the government’s attention and action should be primarily focused.”
The point is that this is not clear cut by any stretch of the imagination, despite the rhetoric being utilised by Farage, Jenrick and their acolytes, misleading rhetoric that has been used to fuel protests and hatred.
Tuesday, September 02, 2025
Even Reform voters are now questioning Brexit
The paper says that a major YouGov survey of 2,224 voters has underlined a significant shift in attitudes to the Brexit debate and suggests that Nigel Farage’s continued hostility towards the EU is not even landing with his own party’s supporters:
According to the findings, 55 per cent of Reform UK (previously the Brexit Party) voters want a permanent youth mobility scheme for young people in the UK and Europe to be put in place with just 34 per cent opposing.
The scheme is being looked at following the Brexit reset by Sir Keir Starmer earlier this year, which the prime minister described as an ongoing process.
Overall, 76 per cent of those asked support the scheme, compared to only 13 per cent who are opposed.
Meanwhile, 62 per cent of Tory voters support the youth mobility scheme despite the party’s hard line in favour of Brexit, while 90 per cent of Sir Keir’s Labour voters back it.
In a further telling result, Reform voters also back closer trading with the EU by 41 per cent to 19 per cent.
Among the options presented to them, only 35 per cent want to be “more distant” from the EU, with 23 per cent wanting closer relations and 32 per cent preferring no change.
Pro-EU campaign group Best for Britain described the support for measures such as youth mobility among Reform voters as “highly significant”.
Tom Brufatto, director of policy, said: “A deal on youth mobility would create new opportunities for young UK and EU citizens alike, as first proposed by the UK Trade and Business Commission in 2021, and, as Best for Britain’s polling found earlier this year, is favoured in every constituency in Great Britain.
“The government must now use this welcome momentum to work at speed with the EU to finalise a deal so Brits can feel the economic benefits – no more time should be wasted.”
Surely, it is now time we moved more quickly towards integrating with the EU and in particular rejoining the single market.
