RT @JonHaidt: Well done, UK Govt; well done PM Starmer. UK Parents love the policy, and the evidence keeps mounting that heavy social med…

We are banning social media access for under 16s. These days kids must find their feet in a world where technology intrudes into every area of their life. I just can’t let that go on anymore. So we’re giving children their childhoods back.

What I am bringing to the role of Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is not a change of course, but a change of gear. I want to work with NHS staff across the country to build on progress, embrace innovation and deliver better care for patients.

We're delivering 2,500,000 more NHS dentist appointments - and the biggest sustained increase in dental school places since 2007, with a dental school in every region. Lots done, lots more to do on NHS Dentistry - incl. reforming dental contract - but we're making progress.

The threats the UK faces are real and they’re growing. We need to meet this moment. I’m staying on as a defence minister to play my part in getting this right.

He turns up with a hard hat for a picture but he really doesn’t have a clue. Labour saved over 500 jobs at Grangemouth with a £120 million package and we’ve just announced £350 million to support the chemicals sector. We’re on the side of the workers - he just pretends to be.

Probably sensible that Mishal Hussein was there to keep us apart! Ten years after the referendum (with every single person in the audience voting for FAILURE over SUCCESS in terms of how Brexit has gone) he was still trotting out the same old nonsense.

The brutal knife attack in Belfast this week was sickening, and I am grateful to the emergency services and members of the public who intervened. The violence that has followed on the streets is also sickening. 1/2

Pippa, with respect, you appear to have moved well beyond reporting and into advocacy. For months now, the Guardian has seemed determined to promote Andy Burnham as the answer to every question while simultaneously publishing a steady stream of stories predicting the imminent demise of Sir Keir Starmer. The problem is that much of this narrative relies on unnamed sources, anonymous briefings and political gossip rather than hard evidence. The reality is that Labour remains in government with a substantial parliamentary majority, and there has been no convincing case made as to why a sitting Prime Minister should be replaced by someone who has yet to present a detailed programme, explain how it would be funded, or demonstrate that he commands support beyond a vocal section of the commentariat. What is particularly striking is that many of the same journalists who spent years criticising Labour for internal division now seem eager to encourage it. Rather than reporting events as they unfold, there is an increasing impression that some are attempting to create a leadership contest through repetition alone. The British public expect governments to govern, not journalists to act as political kingmakers. Until there is evidence of an actual challenge, rather than another round of anonymous briefings, this looks more like a campaign being waged in newspaper columns than one taking place in the Labour Party itself.

It’s Calmer with Starmer

RT @GordonFielden: @Hepworthclare @Jc62Matildamog Claire, you're doing a fine job. Most of these Parliamentary Labour MPs have not consult…

Does this change the optics in Starmer's favour? I think it probably does. Last Friday, Andy Burnham appeared on Newsnight and, for someone presenting himself as a potential Prime Minister, it was hardly a convincing performance. He struggled when questioned about Rachel Reeves's fiscal rules and, more importantly, did not appear to understand what those fiscal rules actually were. For a politician seeking the highest office in the land, that was a significant moment. Fast forward a few days and Newsnight is now reporting that, during a Cabinet meeting, Keir Starmer made it abundantly clear to his ministers that he is going nowhere. If a leadership contest is triggered, he intends to fight it and intends to win it. The fact that this was said directly to Cabinet is important. It was not a briefing, a rumour or a comment from an ally. It was the Prime Minister setting out his position to his government. There are also reports that some Labour MPs who had previously been sympathetic to Burnham are now becoming more cautious following his recent media appearances and the growing scrutiny of his policy positions. Whether that is a reaction to his Newsnight interview, concerns about the practicalities of a leadership challenge, pressure from constituents, or a combination of all three, the assumption that support for Burnham is growing inexorably appears far less certain than some commentators would have us believe. At the same time, Burnham now appears to be stepping back from the idea of an immediate leadership challenge. We are told that, should he win the by-election, he intends to focus first on helping Labour retain the Greater Manchester mayoralty before considering any move against Starmer. That raises a number of interesting questions. Burnham has repeatedly described being Mayor of Greater Manchester as the job he loved and the role he wanted. Yet if Labour struggles to retain that mayoralty after his departure, and Reform emerges as the main beneficiary, what does that say about his record and leadership credentials? Meanwhile, Burnham has not won the by-election. No leadership contest has been called. Labour members have not cast a single vote. Yet parts of the media continue to write as though the outcome is already known. Politics can change quickly. What looked inevitable a few weeks ago suddenly looks far less certain. The more scrutiny Burnham receives, the more Labour members, MPs and voters may begin asking whether he is really the answer to a question many of them were not asking in the first place.

RT @EmilyThornberry: In 2023 I announced a Labour government would reform outdated cohabitation laws to grant equal rights to unmarried cou…

Mick Lynch on Reform & Restore ‘they are all as despicable as each other to me & working class people should turn away from the hatred they spread … you believe in isolating people & taking advantage of poverty so you can divide them & make your friends even richer.’ #newsnight

Does this change the optics in Starmer's favour? I think it probably does. Last Friday, Andy Burnham appeared on Newsnight and, for someone presenting himself as a potential Prime Minister, it was hardly a convincing performance. He struggled when questioned about Rachel Reeves's fiscal rules and, more importantly, did not appear to understand what those fiscal rules actually were. For a politician seeking the highest office in the land, that was a significant moment. Fast forward a few days and Newsnight is now reporting that, during a Cabinet meeting, Keir Starmer made it abundantly clear to his ministers that he is going nowhere. If a leadership contest is triggered, he intends to fight it and intends to win it. The fact that this was said directly to Cabinet is important. It was not a briefing, a rumour or a comment from an ally. It was the Prime Minister setting out his position to his government. There are also reports that some Labour MPs who had previously been sympathetic to Burnham are now becoming more cautious following his recent media appearances and the growing scrutiny of his policy positions. Whether that is a reaction to his Newsnight interview, concerns about the practicalities of a leadership challenge, pressure from constituents, or a combination of all three, the assumption that support for Burnham is growing inexorably appears far less certain than some commentators would have us believe. At the same time, Burnham now appears to be stepping back from the idea of an immediate leadership challenge. We are told that, should he win the by-election, he intends to focus first on helping Labour retain the Greater Manchester mayoralty before considering any move against Starmer. That raises a number of interesting questions. Burnham has repeatedly described being Mayor of Greater Manchester as the job he loved and the role he wanted. Yet if Labour struggles to retain that mayoralty after his departure, and Reform emerges as the main beneficiary, what does that say about his record and leadership credentials? Meanwhile, Burnham has not won the by-election. No leadership contest has been called. Labour members have not cast a single vote. Yet parts of the media continue to write as though the outcome is already known. Politics can change quickly. What looked inevitable a few weeks ago suddenly looks far less certain. The more scrutiny Burnham receives, the more Labour members, MPs and voters may begin asking whether he is really the answer to a question many of them were not asking in the first place.

Of course it can be reversed, and one would expect a Labour government under Sir Keir Starmer to address the issue early in 2029 through a new referendum. If that were to happen, it should be conducted under precisely the same criteria established by the Conservatives for the 2016 vote, namely a simple majority of 50 per cent plus one vote. Those who argued that such a margin was sufficient to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union could hardly object to the same democratic threshold being applied to a decision on whether to rejoin.

RT @GordonFielden: This appears to be yet another attempt by The Guardian to influence the Labour leadership debate. The reality is that An…

I'm fearful, Angela, that you will now find yourself consigned to the backbenches for the remainder of this Parliament. It is a real shame, because you are a talented politician who made one significant error and have paid a very heavy price for it. The media then turned on both you and Sir Keir Starmer, and the consequences have been damaging for you both. I had hoped that, once you received a clean bill of health regarding the allegations against you, and it became clear that there had been no deliberate wrongdoing despite what parts of the press suggested, you would eventually return to government. I believe that would have been thoroughly deserved. Instead of backing Sir Keir Starmer, you chose to support Andy Burnham in a challenge to his leadership. In doing so, you have attached yourself to a project that offers little beyond personal ambition. Burnham has presented himself as an alternative leader, yet has failed to set out policies or ideas that are materially different, and many of his aspirations could not realistically be delivered within the lifetime of this Parliament. In the space of just a few weeks, he has reversed position on so many issues that it is difficult to know what he genuinely stands for. I think there is going to be a considerable shock when ordinary Labour Party members, rather than trade union leaders, give their verdict. My view is that they will back Starmer overwhelmingly in any leadership contest. I have no objection to Andy Burnham serving as a Member of Parliament, or even joining the Government. However, this kind of disloyalty towards a sitting Labour Prime Minister is not something that will be easily forgotten. If Starmer survives, and I believe he will, the political consequences for those who sought to remove him may prove permanent.