Early evening summary
-
Peter Mandelson exchanged WhatsApp messages with a senior cabinet minister criticising Keir Starmer’s lack of “verve” and tendency to buckle under pressure, suggesting the prime minister should behave in a more “Trumpian” fashion. Here is a summary from Peter Walker of what is in the Mandelson files.
The documents run to three volumes and more than 1,000 pages, and journalists are still going through them and digesting the contents. But, although they include some strong criticism of Starmer (mostly from Mandelson), some MPs may conclude that overall the revelations are less excruciating and embarrassing than they feared.
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
Updated
McFadden says he has long history of arguing for welfare reform, in response to criticism of comment in Mandelson files
In a message on social media, Pat McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, has posted this in response to the criticism he is getting from Keir Starmer and others. (See 6.04pm.)
As I often say in interviews and in the Department, “we have to change the question the system asks from “what benefits are you entitled to” to “how do we help you change your life”.
From BBC PM programme...last Thursday (28 May).
He has also posted a link to the BBC interview from last year.
Badenoch claims McFadden message in Mandelson files shows Labour is 'the welfare party'
Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, has said that Pat McFadden’s comment about the views of Labour MPs on welfare reform last year (see 3.15pm) confirms her claim that Labour is “the welfare party”.
She said:
It doesn’t matter who is in charge of these people, the party for Benefits Street will tax us all into poverty to pay for more welfare.
Pat McFadden has said in private what he and the prime minister deny in public. As I’ve said repeatedly, Labour MPs don’t understand where money comes from. They think our taxes are their money to spend, rather than the result of the hard work of the people in our country who deserve so much better.
McFadden and Mandelson sided with Blair in his criticism of Labour's net zero policy last year, files reveal
Helena Horton is a Guardian correspondent.
Pat McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, agreed with a controversial intervention by Tony Blair made last year, during which he caused major upset in the government after rubbishing Labour’s net zero plans.
They were referring to an unhelpful intervention made by Blair last year on the eve of the local elections. The former prime minister commented that Miliband’s net zero plans to limit fossil fuel use and extraction were “doomed to fail”.
In WhatsApp messages to Mandelson, McFadden described Blair’s comments as “spot on” though added: “His office got their timing wrong. Better to have been next week.”
Mandleson seemed unimpressed by Ed Miliband’s response to Blair. The energy secretary said the intervention was “short sighted” and defended his investment in the green economy.
Mandelson said to McFadden: “Ed M couldn’t resist yesterday. So personal and stupid.”
Many energy experts have suspected that Mandelson may have been lobbying behind the scenes to get the government to ditch its net zero plans.
In the messages, he tells McFadden: “I don’t think the government has clocked just how central energy supply and costs are to our economic future”, adding that more energy is needed for “AI and manufacturing success”.
Mandelson accused business department of 'utterly irresponsible' briefing, files reveal
The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) was “cut out of conversations” about the US trade deal in May 2025 over concerns about leaks to the press, the Press Association reports. PA says:
In a series of WhatsApp exchanges with then-communications director at No 10 Steph Driver, Peter Mandelson said the department was being “irresponsible”.
On May 6 2025, he said: “We are reaching a critical time on trade negotiation here and it would be helpful if DBT could stop guiding papers eg. FT (Financial Times).
“We want the deal when agreed to make its own impact not conditioned by pre-briefing.”
Driver replied that she shared his “view and frustration”, and special advisers and officials had been “warned of the risks and sensitivities” while the Cabinet Office had started a leak inquiry.
The next day he shared an article on the trade negotiations from the Guardian with Ms Driver, saying: “This is utterly irresponsible by DBT I assume.”
Driver replied: “I assume too. We cut DBT out of conversations today, the risk is too high.”
Mandelson complained again about briefings from DBT on May 30, after the deal had been announced, saying the department needed to “get off their backsides and co-operate properly with us”.
And he complained again on July 17 about stories in Politico and the Daily Telegraph on efforts to press Donald Trump to cut tariffs, saying: “Can you stop this stuff from DBT?”
He added: “We are trying our best here but this is totally counterproductive designed purely for a domestic audience.”
Here are some revelations from the Mandelson files picked out by journalists at other news organisations.
From Arj Singh at the i
The King asked No 10 if a senior royal should pull out of a conflict-focused visit to the US days after Trump’s bust-up with Zelensky
From Anna Mikhailova at Times Radio
NEW: Wes Streeting joked to Peter Mandelson there should be ‘Mandy the Movie 2’ - in newly-disclosed messages with the then-ambassador Streeting’s comments were in a group chat where he, Mandelson and two others joked about dinners at Roger Liddle’s house
From Richard Holmes at the i
BREAK: Foreign Office staff advised Peter Mandelson to mislead vetting officers about his foreign connections in order to obtain the highest level of security.
New documents released by the Cabinet Office reveal extra scrutiny was placed on Mandelson’s connections to foreign nations by vetting officers.
In response to a request for a detailed list of his overseas connections during the process, the then-Head of US Global Issues and Canada Team at the Foreign Office advised Mandelson send a “handful of names” even though he didn’t consider them “close contacts”.
“That will reassure the vetting team that you’ve been comprehensive,” the Foreign Office official told Mandelson, “even if it’s all quite artificial”.
Big questions about how this process was managed under severe time (and political) pressures.
Mandelson told No 10 not to say anything 'disobliging' about Farage in response to Sun story, files reveal
Peter Mandelson on one occasion urged No 10 not to say anything “disobliging” about Nigel Farage, the files reveal.
He offered the advice to Matthew Doyle, No 10 director of communications at the time, when Doyle asked for guidance on a Sun on Sunday story saying Nigel Farage had been talking to Keir Starmer’s team about dealing with Donald Trump.
Doyle asked if he could deny the story. In response, Mandelson said he had in fact exchanged messages with Farage. He urged Doyle not to say anything “disobliging” about the Reform UK leader, and Doyle agreed he would say it was a story that No 10 did not recognise.
This also provides a useful guide to the code people in government use when trying to get reporters not to follow up stories. When they say they “do not recognise a story”, it is often a sign that there is at least some element of truth in it.
The exchange is on page 187 of volume 3.
Mandelson described government as 'like the Thick of It' as officials faced hitch with Trump red box gift, files reveal
Government really is like the Thick of It. That was the verdict of Peter Mandelson when commenting on the implementation of the plan to present Donald Trump with a cabinet-style red box.
Here is an email from Olly Robbins, head of the Foreign Office at the time, from August 2025 explaining why this was seen as a good idea.
And here is an email from Mandelson to Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, implying he is worried it won’t be ready on time. “This is like something out of the Thick of It,” he said.
Unfortunately, we don’t know the details because so much has been redacted.
(Anything deemed prejudicial to foreign relations was redacted, and so if officials were at any point discussing the president’s colossal vanity and self-importance, then that would have been blotted out.)
In the end Trump did get the red box when he came to the UK for the state visit in September.
MI6 told that Mandelson getting access to sensitive information before getting vetting clearance, files show
Daniel Boffey is the Guardian’s chief reporter.
Peter Mandelson was being treated as a “rather unique case” in being given sight of highly classified material before being vetted, Foreign Office officials had warned the intelligence services ahead of a proposed meeting between the Labour peer and the head of MI6. (See 4.18pm.)
We already knew from Olly Robbins evidence that Mandelson was getting this case-to-case access but it is interesting to note that officials regarded it as “rather unique” and that it was worth the head of MI6 having fore-warning.
Here is the relevant email. It is from a JCS – junior civil servant – to someone at MI6, where C is the boss.
Douglas Alexander, the Scottish secretary, is, like Pat McFadden, someone who worked closely with Peter Mandelson during the Blair/Brown years. Here are exchanges from during and after the general election campaign of 2024 showing Alexander thanking Mandelson for the support he gave in getting Alexander to get selected again as a Labour candidate.
And here is Alexander congratulating Mandelson on being appointed ambassador.
They are from pages 170 and 171 in volume 3.
Some messages between Mandelson and ministers not available due to disappearing messages, or device changes, MPs told
Darren Jones also told MPs that some messages between Peter Mandelson and ministers were not available because of disappearing messages or a change in devices.
Jones said that included some of his own messages with Mandelson.
He said;
I can confirm that we have conducted multiple rounds of discovery from relevant ministers, special advisers and officials in line with the motion passed by the House. This has involved requesting searches of email messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp and other related communication services on both work and personal devices.
However, the House should note that some messages may not have been backed up where devices may have been changed or disappearing messages were turned on for reasonable and permitted reasons, including before the dismissal of Peter Mandelson, or the passing of the humble address, myself included.
I do recall having some limited exchanges with Peter Mandelson over WhatsApp, including those I’ve already discussed in the media, but these conversations did not involve transacting government business, and were in line with official guidance on the use of non-corporate communications channels at the time.
Darren Jones tells MPs all redactions in Mandelson files approved by parliament's intelligence and security committee
Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, told MPs in a Commons statement that no files in the tranche of Mandelson documents released today were redacted without the approval of the parliament’s intelligence and security committee.
In a statement, Jones said:
I can confirm that no material has been redacted on the grounds of prejudice to national security or international relations without the committee’s approval.
Further limited redactions have been made outside of the ISC process in respect of information that relates to junior officials’ names, contact details like telephone numbers and email addresses, the personal or commercially sensitive data of third parties not relevant to the motion, and, where relevant, legal professional privilege.
I can also confirm to the house that no Government minister or special adviser has determined any of the redactions themselves.
The redaction process has been overseen by Cabinet Office officials, and, where relevant, in agreement with the ISC.
Jones also said that Simon Hoare, the Conservative MP who chairs the Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee, had reviewed the government’s approach to third-party reductions in the documents and agreed they were “sensible, reasonable and proportionate”.
Mandelson received sensitive briefings before clearing security vetting, files reveal
Henry Dyer is a Guardian investigations correspondent.
Before Peter Mandelson had completed the developed vetting process, he was receiving sensitive briefings about the Foreign Office’s work, including planned with the head of MI6, the files reveal.
Specially declassified emails say that Mandelson and Richard Moore, the former chief of MI6 (a role known as ‘C’) had directly agreed to meet in early January 2025 before Mandelson went to Washington. During this time Mandelson was still going through the developed vetting process.
A meeting was agreed between them, hosted by C at MI6’s headquarters, to be held after an Atlantic Partnership breakfast, an event which appears to have been planned for 15 January 2025.
As well as plans to meet C, emails note Mandelson had already met in early January with Q: the head of MI6’s technology branch.
Intelligence officials told counterparts in the Foreign Office that , in addition to meeting with C, they wanted to use Mandelson’s presence as a chance to “arrange wider briefings” on topics including “Russia/Ukraine, China, CT [counter-terrorism], the Middle East and cyber.”
At the same time, Mandelson was in the process of declaring to vetting officials his ties to top figures in Russia, China, and Israel, including Oleg Deripaska, who had been sanctioned by the Foreign Office.
Mandelson’s private secretary in the Foreign Office told MI6 they should be aware Mandelson had not yet received DV clearance but had been given access to “higher classification material on a case-by-case basis”. The official said it was for C and other senior MI6 officials to judge what was appropriate.
It is not clear from the documents whether Mandelson’s meeting with C and the security briefings went ahead.
Updated
One of the revelations from the Mandelson files is that Peter Mandelson was very, very obsessed with becoming chancellor of Oxford. Before his appointment as ambassador, when he was contesting the election for the chancellor’s position, he seemed to spend a lot of time contacting Labour MPs with Oxford links who he thought might be able to help him.
Here is an exchange on this theme from August 2024 with Georgia Gould, who was Cabinet Office minister at the time.
Gould is the daughter of the late Philip Gould, the pollster and political consultant who was very close to Mandelson from the time when they were both members of Tony Blair’s inner circle in the 1990s.
Mandelson said Streeting was 'pathetic' and going through 'mid life crisis' over Gaza intervention, files reveal
Peter Mandelson described Wes Streeting as “pathetic” and going through an “early mid life crisis” in an exchange with Pat McFadden in July 2025.
It is on page 254 of volume 3.
It is understood that McFadden and Mandelson were referring to Streeting circulating video evidence of alleged war crimes in Gaza, including atrocities involving children.
No 10 official told colleagues to 'delete all traffic on this', files reveal
Officials discussed the need to “delete all traffic” in one exchange published in the files. It is on page 386 from volume 2. Ailsa Terry, private secretary for foreign affairs at No 10, told recipients about the need to “delete all traffic on this”. Peter Mandelson also gave the same advice.
Parts of the emails have been redacted, and it is not clear what they were discussing.
Mandelson told Louise Haigh Starmer's decision to sack her as transport secretary 'harsh', files reveal
Peter Mandelson told Lou Haigh that her sacking as transport secretary in 2024 over a fraud offence she admitted to before she became an MP was harsh.
In a message to her on 29 November 2024, he said:
Lou, I am very sorry about this. You have been brave and loyal in your decision but it seems harsh given you were appointed in full knowledge.
But you have acted in a way that enables you to come back later and everything you say and do now should be done with that in mind. Strong and honourable.
'Rubbish in, rubbish out' - Mandelson did not rate government's record on policy, files reveal
Peter Mandelson also disparaged the quality of policy making in government in this exchange with Torsten Bell, who is now the pensions minister. It is from July last year.
It is from page 133 of volume 3.
Mandelson’s point about how “it all starts with policy” is one that Tony Blair was making in his essay about Labour and the future last week.
McFadden joked about Labour MPs always asking 'who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others', files reveal
Here is an extract from another exchange between Peter Mandelson and Pat McFadden in May 2025.
Mandelson said Gordon Brown had lost faith in Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves. He also said that the PLP was in a “mutinous state”, and that Angela Rayner was seen as an “instrument of destabilisation”.
And McFadden, who was Cabinet Office minister at the time but who is now work and pensions secretary, complained about Labour MPs always asking “who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others”?
They are on page 243 of volume 3.
Mandelson thought, as privy counsellor, he could see secret documents without vetting, files reveal
Henry Dyer is a Guardian investigations correspondent.
In the days between Peter Mandelson’s announcement as the next ambassador and Christmas, officials debated whether he needed to go through the vetting process at all.
The documents show that, because Mandelson was a member of the House of Lords, some officials initially believed he would not need “developed vetting” but would have to go through clearance for STRAP, a classification used for the British government’s most sensitive documents.
This belief was based on an internal paper (not released in the humble address) about vetting. One civil servant joked: “It’s nice having policies written down sometimes.”
As they discussed this, the head of the Foreign Office’s Americas desk, Robert Tinline, noted one person felt briefings could begin: “Mandelson thinks that as a privy councillor [sic] he can see things without waiting for vetting.”
But upon reflection officials decided clearance would be necessary for the man taking up the UK’s most high-profile diplomatic posting.
One email from the Foreign Office’s head of security, Ian Collard, shows him warning on 23 December that the US “are strict about clearance matters”. He said the Americans “will likely check Lord Mandelson’s clearance” with the Foreign Office’s security team before there were any sensitive discussions in Washington.
Collard added: “Failure to report the correct clearance could have an awkward impact, which we would want to avoid.”
Collard would go on to recommend that Mandelson be given developed vetting clearance despite the recommendation of vetting officials it be denied.
Mandelson described Starmer's working cycle as 'advance/buckle/advance/buckle', files reveal
Here is another extract from the Mandleson/McFadden exchanges on 30 July 2025. (See 2.46pm.) Mandelson said the cycle for Starmer was ‘advance/buckle/advance/buckle’.
It is on page 255 of volume 3.
Updated
Mandelson declined to hand over his personal phone so messages could be published, files reveal
The files reveal that Peter Mandelson apparently “declined to comply” with a request to hand over his personal phone and allow the government to publish WhatsApp messages and other information related to his appointment, according the the Press Association.
Updated
Mandelson told Lammy government would 'never regret' making him ambasador, letter reveals
Peter Mandelson said the government would “never regret” appointing him as Britain’s ambassador to the US, a note published alongside thousands of documents about the posting has revealed.
UPDATE: Mandelson said:
Dear David,
As today (and all week) is polling day in Oxford and I am returning to London, I wanted to drop you a line, personally, about Washington.
Thankfully, the media speculation has gone away and I hope this was not too irritating to you. I just wanted you to know that if you were minded to appoint me I would make sure you never regret it …
For me it would be the last thing I do in public life and it would be a huge honour to serve you and the government in this role. So if you are up for it, so am I.
Updated
Mandelson described No 10 operation as 'beleaguered and bereft', files reveal
Here is another exchange between Pat McFadden and Peter Mandelson from July last year. Mandelson was criticising the No 10 operation, which he called “beleaguered and bereft”.
It is on page 255 of volume 3.
Updated
Mandelson told McFadden 'Keir lacks verve as does the cabinet as a whole', files reveal
Here is an exchange where Pat McFadden, who at the time was Cabinet Office minister, was asking Peter Mandelson for advice on government messaging after the 2025 local elections.
At one point Mandelson says “Keir [Starmer] lacks verve, as does the cabinet as a whole.”
These start on page 239 in volume 3.
Updated
Mandelson urged Starmer to meet John Major, files reveal
Here is an exchange of messages between Peter Mandelson and Keir Starmer before and after the 2024 election. Mandelson is urging Starmer to meet John Major.
It is on page 283 in volume 3.
Updated
It is going to take a while for the most interesting material to appear.
A word search for Keir Starmer in volume one brings up an email from Peter Mandelson to Lord Vallance, the science minister, written in July 2024 says:
Labour has, let’s say, two terms to succeed. So far Keir’s team has not prioritised policy (not surprising given how much else had to be re-built after Corbyn). And the No 10 policy team is not large or experienced. Pat at the Cabinet Office will have the right instincts but I am an afficionado of the Cabinet Office (I started there as Minister without Portfolio and ended there as First Secretary of State) and it is a light touch co-ordinator not a power house.
It is on page 167 of the file
If you can find interesting documents, do please flag them up BTL.
Government publishes Mandelson files
The Cabinet Office has published the Mandelson files.
They are in three volumes.
Robert Kenyon, the Reform UK candidate in Makerfield, posted this on social media about the new logo unveiled by Andy Burnham. (See 12.22pm.)
Andy wants to change Labour. I want to change Makerfield.
That’s the difference.
That prompted this reply from the Labour MP Luke Charters.
Sounds like you certainly wouldn’t change Reform, with your misogynistic and pro-Kremlin views.
That’s the difference.
For more on the Makerfield byelection, it is worth reading this thread from the More in Common pollster Luke Tryl about what he has picked up from focus groups in the constituency. Here is one of his main points.
5. There is going to be a lot of nose holding. Versions of “I don’t like Labour but I don’t want Reform” “If it weren’t Burnham i’d never vote Labour” “I don’t like Farage but we’ve got to get Labour out” “I’d vote Restore but they can’t win” Voting ‘against’ is now a major feature of our politics.
And this is what he says specifically about Kenyon.
8. Kenyon’s past comments split people, particuarly women, some say everyone says stupid things, others question if they’re real, but a sizeable group are put off by them - and in particular the failure of Kenyon to make a proper apology.
Many said if he’d apologised properly it would matter less. Substantively the comment about abortion probably seems like it might matter more than the sexist/misogynist comments, and there a degree of ‘mind your own business’
In his Times story about the Peter Mandelson files, Matt Dathan says the documents will show that Mandelson “contacted some of Labour’s new intake of male MPs to meet up for dinner”. Dathan says Mandelson contacted ministers he knew to get phone numbers for MPs he did not know.
Dathan also quotes a minister who has seen some of the messages about to be published as saying:
They’re going to upset a lot of people, particularly Labour members. The content is a lot of sycophancy and fawning all over Mandelson. It’s going to be very uncomfortable about how he talks about some MPs, how he would love to speak with them and have dinner with them.
In an interview with GB News this morning, James Murray, the new health secretary, said he was not worried about his own messages to Peter Mandelson being disclosed. He said:
I’m not concerned. There’s a couple of messages when he was standing for the … chancellor of Oxford position, but that was.
Mandelson came second from last in the election to be chancellor of Oxford. (William Hague won.) But at one point he did explore whether he would be able to combine doing the job with being ambassador to the US.
While the polling of the views of trade union members published today (see 10.53am) would appear to support claims that Labour should be moving closer to the Reform UK position on some issues, another poll published at the weekend suggests Labour should be much more worried about losing votes to the Greens.
In a post on his Comment is Freed Substack blog, Sam Freedman disclosed the results of a Convergent Opinion poll of 10,000 people who voted in the local elections that was intended to find out why they voted as they did.
It shows that 30% of people who voted Green were also open to voting Labour (they said they had considered it), but only 6% of people who voted Reform UK were.
In his commentary, Freedman says:
At a national level it is now well established that Labour is losing more votes to the Greens and Lib Dems than Reform. Pollsters don’t agree on how big this gap is but they do agree there is one. We also know that voters who have switched to parties on the left are more willing to consider returning that ones who’ve gone rightwards. Our poll found that 30% of voters who ended up going Green considered voting Labour, but only 6% of those who went Reform.
A political strategy [by Labour] that refuses to acknowledge this skew towards the Greens, or that tries to dismiss them as crazies, is not going to work.
The research also found that Reform UK supporters were far more likely to vote in the local elections than the supporters of other parties – which contributed to the reasons why Nigel Farage’s party did so well.
The Labour MP Luke Akehurst is not impressed by what the Times is describing as Burnham’s new logo for the Makerfield byelection. (See 12.22pm.) Akehurst, who is not a cheerleader for the Burnham fan club, says:
I’m guessing this isn’t real as
A) it has no imprint to say it has been authorised for publication by the General Secretary of the Labour Party
B) the logo looks like it was designed in the early 1990s by a local branch of the Socialist Worker Student Society & doesn’t follow any Labour brand guidelines
C) there is a typo - should read “Vote Labour” not “Change Labour”
UK will not have to pay Rwanda £100m over failed asylum scheme, court rules
The UK will not have to pay the Rwandan government millions of pounds over a failed migrant deportation scheme set up by Boris Johnson’s administration, an international court has ruled. Rajeev Syal has the story.
Corbyn says ban on Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker coming to UK 'absurd and cowardly'
Jeremy Corbyn, the parliamentary leader of Your Party, has also criticised the government’s decision to ban two US commentators from entering the country, apparently because their views on Israel and fears that what they say at speaking events could exacerbate antisemitism. (See 11.17am.) Corbyn said:
Banning Cenk Uyghur and Hasan Piker from entering the UK is an absurd and cowardly decision from an increasingly authoritarian government.
Let us call this what it is: an attack on the freedom to criticise Israel, as well as the UK government’s own complicity in genocide.
Andy Burnham revives call for Labour to loosen how it uses whipping system to force MPs to toe party line
Andy Burnham has renewed his call for Labour to relax with way it uses the party whipping system to get its MPs to vote in line with what the leadership wants.
The Greater Manchester mayor has been a critic of the whipping system for many years – leading to claims from Westminster insiders that it is naive to think parliamentary politics can operate without a mechanism to ensure MPs elected under a party banner vote in line with what the party decides.
But these arguments have not stopped Burnham restating his views in an interview with Patrick Maguire from the Times. Burnham is officially campaigning to be the Labour MP for Makerfied, but he is also unofficially campaigning to be the next prime minister – as part of a process that is widely expected to see him replacing Keir Starmer fairly soon – and so his views on the internal workings of the PLP (parliamentary Labour party) have now become highly significant.
In the interview, Burnham did not propose abandoning the whipping system in its entirety. But he said that it was wrong for Labour leaders in the past to use the whips to strongarm MPs into voting for measures they opposed.
He explained:
I look back at the times when I was in the PLP … if we’d gone with what the PLP was saying — and I am talking about Iraq, but I’m talking about other things as well — the conscience of the PLP will guide the government, that’s what I believe.
Burnham said he wanted MPs to be “authentic representatives of their places” and that they should not be punished “for taking a position that actually connects with people they are serving”.
He went on:
The loosening of the whip system would raise the status of members of parliament. It would let them appear more authentic to their constituents. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. It’s like tablets of stone in Westminster, but to me it’s not: if a sizeable number of Labour MPs can’t support the government, then it’s probably the wrong thing.
In his interview, Burnham also criticised what he called “the sneering commentary that sometimes I get”, referring to the oft-quoted Westminister joke about his alleged ideological elasticity. (“A Blairite, a Brownite and a Corbynite all go into a pub. The barman asks: ‘What are you having, Andy?”) Burnham said:
I don’t want to sound too touchy about this, but rather than ridiculing me, I think it says something about the people that tell that joke: that they are factional. That they are not team players, that they are factional, and they revel in their factionalism within Labour, whereas I’ve tried to support Labour.
Burnham also showed the Times his new campaign logo, which will be printed on beermats and distributed around the constituency. Maguire said it is inspired by northern soul badges.
Now only the last fully resembles its former glory, and even then, with its perennial financial woes, only just. “You have to stay connected or you don’t succeed — you don’t exist,” says Burnham. “But the difference between the Labour Party and rugby league is, while rugby league has its challenges, it’s run by the northern set, and I don’t think the same can always be said of the Labour Party.”
No 10 says release of Mandelson files will be 'unprecedented piece of government transparency'
At the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson said the release of the Mandelson files today would be “an unprecedented piece of government transparency”.
He said that party political material would be included, despite precedent suggesting it should be included, and that some material had to be declassified to allow it to be published.
The material will be published this afternoon, ahead of a statement to MPs at some point after 3.30pm.
The spokesperson said:
The broad scope of the [humble address motion – see 9.26am] has required the discovery, assessment, analysis and preparation of thousands of individual documents and messages.
This is a task that has involved every government department.
The result is the largest ever government response to a humble address.
It represents represents thousands of hours of work from officials across the government to deliver an unprecedented piece of government transparency.
Our guiding principle throughout has been to comply as transparently and as swiftly as possible.
For example, material of a party political nature will be included in the publication, which is contrary to usual practice and precedent, in order to demonstrate the maximum possible transparency.
A number of documents have also been declassified to enable publication.
In order to provide transparency to parliament and the public, alongside the documents we will also provide a clear explanation of the steps taken in this official-led process to gather the documents and the approach to any redactions.
And following the publication of the documents, the chief secretary to the prime minister [Darren Jones] will make a statement to the house.
New health secretary James Murray says he would no longer say trans women are women
James Murray, who recently replaced Wes Streeting as health secretary after Streeting resigned so he could start campaigning to be the next Labour leader, has said he is “absolutely clear” that single-sex spaces within the NHS should be “protected on the basis of sex”.
He made the comment in an interview on the Today programme where he also said he would no longer use the phrase “trans women are women”.
Murray said he had thought “in quite some detail” about use of language when it was put to him that he had in the past stated that “trans women are women”. Asked if he had changed his mind, he replied:
Yeah, I have changed what I would say. I wouldn’t say that phrase any more.
And I think that, you know, over the last few years, I think a lot of us, myself included, have thought about this question in quite some detail.
The supreme court has obviously ruled very clearly that biological sex is what matters when it comes to the Equality Act, and determining the importance of single-sex spaces …
I believe that single-sex spaces should be protected on the basis of sex, on the basis of biological sex, whilst at the same time believing in dignity for trans people, recognising that sex and gender are different things, but being absolutely clear that single-sex spaces within the NHS, for instance, need to be protected on the basis of sex.
In a separate interview, Murray told Sky News he has the neurological condition myasthenia gravis – a rare, long-term condition that causes muscle weakness. It most commonly affects the muscles that control the eyes and eyelids, facial expressions, chewing, swallowing and speaking, according to the NHS website.
Updated
Polanski condemns decision to ban two US commentators from UK, accusing Home Office of silencing criticism of Israel
Zack Polanski, the Green party leader, has criticised the government’s decision to ban two US commentators from entering the UK. They are both strongly anti-Israel, and the Home Office has said their presence “may not be conducive to the public good”.
In a post on Bluesky, he said:
This is a really grim decision alongside Cenk.
People often talk about dangerous road we’d go down under a Reform government - this is another clear warning we’re down there already.
A Labour government doing everything possible to silence criticism of the Israeli Government
Referring to a newspaper claim claiming Andy Burnham could make Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, his chancellor if he become PM, Polanksi also said:
Shabana Mahmood, we’re told will get a senior position in an Andy Burnham government.
She needs to explain this strange and worrying decision, and Andy Burnham needs to make his view clear.
Updated
Farage claims Reform UK party of 'patriotic working class', as poll suggests union members as likely to back it as Labour
The Times has published polling today from JL Partners saying that trade union members are as likely to support Reform UK as Labour.
Around 1,000 trade union members were polled, and Reform UK and Labour both attracted 28% support. In 2024 Labour was on 24% with union members.
According to the poll, Reform UK is also comfortably ahead amongst Unite members (on 36%, against 30% for Labour) and amongst GMB members (on 31%, against 22% for Labour). But Unison members are slightly more pro-Labour (28%) than pro-Reform UK (25%), the poll suggests.
Commenting on the poll, Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, said:
Labour is no longer the party of the patriotic working class. That mantle now belongs to Reform.
Union leaders told the Times the figures showed Labour would be on course for electoral wipe-out without a significant change of course.
Sharon Graham, the Unite general secretary, told the paper Labour had “no natural right to exist” and that there was “no guarantee that workers will return”. She said:
Labour has abandoned the working class, and the working class have abandoned Labour.
Being prepared to cut the winter fuel allowance, slash benefits for the disabled and aid and abet a jobless transition for oil and gas workers at the same time workers and their families are struggling with a baked-in cost of living crisis is not the change people voted for.
And Gary Smith, the GMB general secretary, told the paper:
Reform are no friends of workers. They want to cancel hugely important union rights and are targeting the pensions of the low paid.
But Labour has to show working-class people it can be on their side — as it did with last week’s essential help for our ceramics industry.
Updated
The UK will not have to pay Rwanda millions of pounds over the failed migrant deportation deal after winning a case at The Hague’s permanent court of arbitration in the Netherlands, the Press Association reports.
I will post more on the story when I get it.
Updated
Former Labour Scottish first minister Jack McConnnell calls for joint Westminster/Holyrood inquiry into SNP embezzlement scandal
Jack McConnell, a former Labour Scottish first minister, has called for a joint inquiry between Holyrood and Westminster into Peter Murrell’s embezzlement of SNP funds.
McConnell said the Commons public accounts committee should hold a probe with the equivalent Scottish parliament committee.
In an interview with the Scotsman, McConnell said:
This is about the fact that the SNP were the third largest party at Westminster for the best part of 10 years. They received over that time millions of pounds of public money to organise their party affairs.
Obviously there are also issues about signing off accounts, and how seriously that was all taken, and I think on all these areas there are issues to be looked at, and recommendations that must be made. So I think this should be a joint public inquiry.
I think it should probably be led by the public accounts committee of the House of Commons but it should be done equally and jointly with the equivalent committee at Holyrood so it’s not seen to be the UK Parliament poking its nose into Scottish politics, but the issues about political party funding, about public money, and about the way in which the transparency of political parties’ use of small donations, the protection for small donors.
These are issues that are UK-wide. They’re issues for the Electoral Commission and for the UK parliament.
Two prominent US political commentators who were due to speak at events in the UK this week have said they have been banned from entering the country, Kevin Rawlinson reports.
What humble address says what government must release in Mandelson files
Here is the text of the humble address passed by the Commons about the Peter Mandelson files in February. It specifies exactly what the government should be publishing.
That an humble address be presented to His Majesty, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions to require the government to lay before this house all papers relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as His Majesty’s ambassador to the United States of America, including but not confined to the Cabinet Office due diligence which was passed to Number 10, the Conflict of Interest Form Lord Mandelson provided to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), material the FCDO and the Cabinet Office provided to UK Security Vetting about Lord Mandelson’s interests in relation to Global Counsel, including his work in relation to Russia and China, and his links to Jeffrey Epstein, papers for, and minutes of, meetings relating to the decision to appoint Lord Mandelson, electronic communications between the prime minister’s chief of staff [Morgan McSweeney] and Lord Mandelson, and between ministers and Lord Mandelson, in the six months prior to his appointment, minutes of meetings between Lord Mandelson and ministers in the six months prior to his appointment, all information on Lord Mandelson provided to the prime minister prior to his assurance to this House on 10 September 2025 that ‘full due process was followed during this appointment’, electronic communications and minutes of all meetings between Lord Mandelson and ministers, government officials and special advisers during his time as ambassador, and the details of any payments made to Lord Mandelson on his departure as ambassador and from the civil service except papers prejudicial to UK national security or international relations which shall instead be referred to the intelligence and security committee of parliament.
The key clause is the one demanding the release of "electronic communications and minutes of all meetings between Lord Mandelson and ministers, government officials and special advisers during his time as ambassador”. This is very far-reaching. The Tories have may expected Labour to object, but at the time (early February) the most recent revelations about Mandelson’s links with Epstein were so shocking Labour was not in a position to object.
Embarrassing WhatsApps, but no vetting report: what will be in the new release of Mandelson files?
Here is Pippa Crerar and Henry Dyer’s explainer about what will be in the Mandelson files.
No 10 braced for 'excruciating' revelations as private messages between Mandelson and ministers to be released
Good morning. Many people despair at the quality of governance in Britain at the moment, but in one respect we are living through a golden age; if you are interested in contemporary history, and learning about what actually happens at the heart of government, then you can now – sometimes – access the sort of information never available before.
Today the government is publishing a mass of information – apparently running to three volumes, and more than 1,000 pages – containing the private messages Peter Mandelson exchanged with government ministers and officials when he was ambassador to the US, and before his appointment. Last month a minister compared this to the evidence released as part of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war. But the Chilcot inquiry took place in the era before WhatsApp, and it was publishing secret memos – intended for circulation within Whitehall. WhatsApp messages are a lot more personal; reading them is like being able to eavesdrop on a private conversation. Mandelson is a man with spiky, controversial views, who loves gossip and plotting, and whose private views don’t always accord with what he has said in public. It should be fascinating.
These documents are being published because the government has to comply with a humble address – a Commons vote mandating ministers to release information – tabled by the Conservative party. Several humble addresses have been passed in recent years (since this ancient parliamentary mechanism, which had been forgotten about for decades, was revived during the Brexit wars by the Labour Brexit spokesperson, a certain Keir Starmer) but none of them have been as far-reaching as this one.
The Conservatives tabled the humble address because they wanted to learn more about how Mandelson came to be appointed ambassador to the US despite the fact that it was known at the time that he had maintained a friendship with Jeffrey Epstein even after he was first convicted for child sex offences. As Kiran Stacey, Henry Dyer and Pippa Crerar report, the documents out today will imply that the Foreign Office did not seem particulary bothered about ensuring that the supposed “mitigations” in place to manage the risks associated with Mandelson being appointed amounted to very much.
But, on the broader question of why Mandelson was appointed, we are unlikely to learn much because it is already obvious why he got the job: he wanted it, he was close to Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff who had more influence over what Starmer did than anyone else, and McSweeney and Starmer were both persuaded that Mandelson’s fondness for dodgy billionaires would enable him to form a good relationship with Donald Trump (even though this argument was inherently flawed, because the Trump administration did not want him).
Instead, the main revelations this afternoon are likely to focus on what members of the government have been saying about each other in private. On the Today programme Chris Mason, the BBC’s political editor, said some of the messages would be “excruciating”. Financial Times says: “The messages are expected to include frontbenchers and Mandelson trading humiliating remarks about Starmer.” Politico’s London Playbook says: “One person familiar with the content of the files told Playbook it will be ‘toe-curling’.”
Government sources have been saying they don’t expect any of the revelations to lead to resignations. That’s not much of a bonus; for the Conservative party, today will probably feel like Christmas has come early.
Ironically, one person not likely to be embarrassed about any of this is Trump. Government ministers are always diplomatic and polite about the US president in public. It is fair to assume that, in private, their views are a bit more aligned with the views of normal people, like you and me. But parliament agreed that material deemed “prejudicial to UK national security or international relations” would be withheld, so any juicy anti-Trump stuff will remain secret.
James Murray, the new health secretary, has been giving interviews this morning. Speaking about the release of the Mandelson files, he told Sky News:
I think the level of transparency is going to be unprecedented. The volume of information that’s going to be put out is unprecedented.
It’s right we do that. We have been very clear that the appointment of Mandelson was wrong.
Parliament then decided that this information will be made public. The government is fully complying with that, and it’s important that we honour that commitment to transparency.
Here is the agenda for the day.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: John Healey, the defence secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
Afternoon: The government is publishing the rest of the Mandelson files. Darren Jones, the chief seceretary to the PM, will make a statement to MPs to mark their publication after 3.30pm. The documents should be published when he gives his statement at the latest, but may come a bit earlier.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
