Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Keir starmer is dead in the water

1000 replies

Bertiebiscuit · 04/02/2026 22:21

The UK cannot have a prime minister who gave a plum job to a man when all the time he knew that Mandelson was still close friends with an ex-con who was convicted for trafficking children for sexual abuse. Starmer is destroying the reputation of the UK, he is an embarrassment and shoukd resign, if not the Labour party should demand his resignation.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Goldwren1923 · 05/02/2026 10:15

Are you Farage supporter?
im sure UK can’t vote for someone who took money from Epstein, right?
rights??

Bromptotoo · 05/02/2026 10:17

snowmichael · 05/02/2026 10:11

Depends on the timing
If Burnham truly wants to stand as an MP, all he has to do is stand down as Mayor, then the Labout NEC has no power to exclude him from consideration by the local party
However, standing down as Mayor requires a 28 day notice period

There are currently no vacancies in the Commons, never mind vacancies in seats Labour have reasonable prospect of winning.

Somebody offered to resign so he could stand in their place. The last time that was tried it didn't work - see Patrick Gordon-Walker.

A mayoral by-election in Manchester caused by the incumbent's rush to the greasy pole would be an open goal for Reform UK.

And I'm not convinced the NEC couldn't still put a spoke in Burnham's wheel if they were motivated to do so.

Wheresthebeach · 05/02/2026 10:17

Inforgotten · 05/02/2026 10:14

Private Eye really are such an excellent publication - never afraid to speak truth to power

Except they have been disappointingly quiet on the TRA's and women's rights.

godmum56 · 05/02/2026 10:18

I think that KS was planned to be the "bounceback leader" after Corbyn. family man, jewish wife, "establishment" enough not to frighten the voters, staid enough to contrast well with Boris and controllable by old Labour. Once Labour had established a continually electable image then out goes bounceback and in comes.....who? Unfortunately whoever was supposed to be doing the managing didn't do a particularlly good job did they?

Abhannmor · 05/02/2026 10:18

DoIdriveaVauxhallZafira · 04/02/2026 22:47

Boris was still worse and he clung on for ages, its looking dire for Starmer but I wouldn't write him off just yet.

Well , yes and he did give his security the slip so he could go to a ' bunga bunga party'. Sent a Russian oligarch to the Lords etc. He does tend to get a free pass.
Whereas Starmer got a honeymoon period of around 48 hours.

But that's the way the UK media rolls. Fact is he isn't very good at politics day to day , including media. Why cling on like Boris? He should set up an inquiry , with real teeth , into Corruption. Then resign and call a leadership election. Might get a proper Labour government.

Vinvertebrate · 05/02/2026 10:18

snowmichael · 05/02/2026 09:59

If they were not known, how come Private Eye reported them (yes, including the passing on confidential briefing documents) over a decade ago?
They were threatened with a libel suit by Mandy, and also the threat of a very old law about defaming PC members
Hislop said, in effect, "Bring it on"
Mandy backed down
Why don't parliamentary party whips read Private Eye?

Absolutely this. Private Eye doing pretty much all the journalistic heavy lifting on corruption in parliament and locally. Doing God's work in investigative journalism too. Ian Hislop is a bloody hero.

No surprise that Labour's stasi-like approach to thoughtcrime now means you can get arrested for waving a copy about, even if you're a pensioner.

OT but they are asking all the right questions about the Letby case too.

Nanny0gg · 05/02/2026 10:19

Happyjoe · 04/02/2026 23:01

Did Starmer know that he did that insider info though? That's the important part.

Apparently he did

endofthelinefinally · 05/02/2026 10:19

godmum56 · 05/02/2026 10:08

yep, me too.

Me too.
I can't understand why anyone thinks that KS has any control over anything. The unions are in charge and always have been. With all the misogyny and self serving agendas that go with that.
Everyone knew what Mandy was like back in the Blair days.
It will be interesting to see what/ who comes out of the woodwork and the extent of the cover ups.

EasternStandard · 05/02/2026 10:19

Bromptotoo · 05/02/2026 10:17

There are currently no vacancies in the Commons, never mind vacancies in seats Labour have reasonable prospect of winning.

Somebody offered to resign so he could stand in their place. The last time that was tried it didn't work - see Patrick Gordon-Walker.

A mayoral by-election in Manchester caused by the incumbent's rush to the greasy pole would be an open goal for Reform UK.

And I'm not convinced the NEC couldn't still put a spoke in Burnham's wheel if they were motivated to do so.

Yes call for a BAME or all women shortlist if the mayoral cost excuse has gone. But I think it’s past that now as Starmer is facing threats earlier than Burnham can make a move.

HairyToity · 05/02/2026 10:21

I have had enough of chopping and changing PMs all the time, and would like to see him stay.

Yes he made a mistake, Mandelson was chummy with Trump, and Starmer thought this would be good for UK PLC. He overlooked Mandelson's past and Epstein links. I don't think he should be brought down by it though.

godmum56 · 05/02/2026 10:22

Abhannmor · 05/02/2026 10:18

Well , yes and he did give his security the slip so he could go to a ' bunga bunga party'. Sent a Russian oligarch to the Lords etc. He does tend to get a free pass.
Whereas Starmer got a honeymoon period of around 48 hours.

But that's the way the UK media rolls. Fact is he isn't very good at politics day to day , including media. Why cling on like Boris? He should set up an inquiry , with real teeth , into Corruption. Then resign and call a leadership election. Might get a proper Labour government.

the thing with Boris is no one expected better. Its like junk food, we KNOW its not a healthy option. Imagine the howling if the healthy homecooked version turned out to be bad for us!

Parentingconfusing · 05/02/2026 10:23

Gobacktotheworld2 · 05/02/2026 09:05

You certainly are.:D

Now you are just a country full of contributors and people who love the place, speak its language, observe its cultural and historical practices, and work hard to keep it afloat

Oh wait...

Well this was a journey to read this morning.

It’s very muddled. I am not going to dissect the entirety of this madness but I think one day when you are calm you should read back and realise how contradictory it is.

Angry because we let people in (ref. To not everyone speaking English), angry because we dont let people in (ref. To being an inbred isle), angry to pay NHS surcharge, and angry that the system doesn’t have enough money and you had to wait. Angry that we have a welfare state and lots of non contributors, yet also angry when we ask economic immigrants to actually be contributors.

Honestly it’s all over the place. The reason its not rational is because this is emotion - it’s anger and hatred.

You have left, be happy then. Carrying this hatred with you can’t be healthy - maybe get therapy?

GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER · 05/02/2026 10:24

Parentingconfusing · 05/02/2026 03:34

Yeah we have a lot of shit going on. But we don’t blame it on other people. Ever.

Has it ever, and I mean ever AT ALL crossed your mind that you hate the Greeks? Such awful people they are being descended from the Romans. I can answer that for you - it’s a no because that’s just not in our psyche or zeitgeist or narrative.

Do you even wake at night thinking the Russians are such awful an people? Considering they have bombed and maimed many Ukrainians? No, because that’s Putin not Russians.

Do you detest Jews? (to use PPs highly emotive language) Because of Gaza? Obviously not because that’s Netanyahu and not Isreali peoples fault, it’s not even Israel’s fault. It’s just one psycho man yet again.

WTF are you talking about - the Greeks being descended from the Romans??

NautilusLionfish · 05/02/2026 10:26

Bertiebiscuit · 04/02/2026 22:21

The UK cannot have a prime minister who gave a plum job to a man when all the time he knew that Mandelson was still close friends with an ex-con who was convicted for trafficking children for sexual abuse. Starmer is destroying the reputation of the UK, he is an embarrassment and shoukd resign, if not the Labour party should demand his resignation.

In all fairness Starmer did not ruin the uk's reputation. That happened between May 2010 and 2024, getting progressively worse. July 2019 it started becoming a joke. By 6 Sept 2022 it wasnt even funny. It was a tragedy. Starmer had the chance to change things but he just turned it from tragedy to meh. An improvement of sorts if you are an aggressive optimist.

Parentingconfusing · 05/02/2026 10:28

GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER · 05/02/2026 10:24

WTF are you talking about - the Greeks being descended from the Romans??

🤣 Yeah you’re right!

See that’s how little I cared which population/ country was descended from our colonisers. It’s not even embedded as a fact let alone a perpetual hatred.

Coffeeandbooks88 · 05/02/2026 10:30

Bet you made less fuss about Boris and his shenanigans.

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 05/02/2026 10:31

snowmichael · 05/02/2026 10:04

> what was and wasn't known by Starmer
Why isn't what was generally known and reported in Private Eye et al a good benchmark for analysing the risk of appointing him?
I cannot believe that no one warned Starmer

If they were going to kick him out on that basis alone, then they would have done it ages ago. The fact that PM maintained a friendship with JE after his conviction has been in the public domain for ages. It isn't news, and we have known for a while that this fact was known to KS at the time the appointment was made.

Rightly or wrongly, KS remained in post despite all of that, having argued that he had not realised the depth or extent of PM's friendship with JE.

What will hopefully emerge from the documentation when it's published is a much greater degree of clarity about what exactly KS did actually know and what he didn't know; the extent to which any warnings may or may not have been given and whether or not these were acted upon or ignored; and indeed the extent to which it might be deemed that any "due diligence" that was done was sufficient and appropriate for the seniority and risk profile associated with the Ambassador role.

I think Starmer's survival as PM, at least in the short term, is probably dependent on the detail that emerges from those documents. If it turns out that he ignored clear warnings and/or that he knew much more than he has previously indicated, then he will have to go. If the evidence largely backs up his account to date and PM was given clearance after the vetting process, then he might cling on at least until the May elections or perhaps even longer.

Regardless of how things pan out for KS, I think this whole sorry saga highlights serious issues with how our systems are operating. If KS didn't know more about PM's previous behaviour, then it sounds like the vetting process is sorely inadequate - surely our intelligence services should have been able to find out enough to have been able to warn KS that PM was a significant risk? And if KS did know more details, was warned against appointing PM and then chose to appoint him anyway, why on earth are we allowing one individual to exercise so much power without having any proper checks and balances in place? Either way, the systems and processes don't appear to be serving us well.

nomas · 05/02/2026 10:31

Nanny0gg · 05/02/2026 10:19

Apparently he did

According to who? Because if it's true then that's career ending for him too. Do you have a source?

EasternStandard · 05/02/2026 10:31

Coffeeandbooks88 · 05/02/2026 10:30

Bet you made less fuss about Boris and his shenanigans.

Did you make more?

Irren · 05/02/2026 10:32

God I'm so tired of people thinking we should change PMs every two minutes or have a general election whenever something happens someone doesn't like.

bonsconkers · 05/02/2026 10:34

Dragonscaledaisy · 05/02/2026 10:12

A quick search through their posts will quickly tell you that. Oh dear......

No idea, any clues?

nomas · 05/02/2026 10:35

EasternStandard · 05/02/2026 10:31

Did you make more?

I'm guessing not, because like Trump, BoJo acting like a fool lets a right wing government get away with a lot.

EasternStandard · 05/02/2026 10:35

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 05/02/2026 10:31

If they were going to kick him out on that basis alone, then they would have done it ages ago. The fact that PM maintained a friendship with JE after his conviction has been in the public domain for ages. It isn't news, and we have known for a while that this fact was known to KS at the time the appointment was made.

Rightly or wrongly, KS remained in post despite all of that, having argued that he had not realised the depth or extent of PM's friendship with JE.

What will hopefully emerge from the documentation when it's published is a much greater degree of clarity about what exactly KS did actually know and what he didn't know; the extent to which any warnings may or may not have been given and whether or not these were acted upon or ignored; and indeed the extent to which it might be deemed that any "due diligence" that was done was sufficient and appropriate for the seniority and risk profile associated with the Ambassador role.

I think Starmer's survival as PM, at least in the short term, is probably dependent on the detail that emerges from those documents. If it turns out that he ignored clear warnings and/or that he knew much more than he has previously indicated, then he will have to go. If the evidence largely backs up his account to date and PM was given clearance after the vetting process, then he might cling on at least until the May elections or perhaps even longer.

Regardless of how things pan out for KS, I think this whole sorry saga highlights serious issues with how our systems are operating. If KS didn't know more about PM's previous behaviour, then it sounds like the vetting process is sorely inadequate - surely our intelligence services should have been able to find out enough to have been able to warn KS that PM was a significant risk? And if KS did know more details, was warned against appointing PM and then chose to appoint him anyway, why on earth are we allowing one individual to exercise so much power without having any proper checks and balances in place? Either way, the systems and processes don't appear to be serving us well.

His survival depends on his party and going by Karl Turner this morning there’s calls for McSweeney to go.

Given Starmer’s gushing about him getting him into power it’s a difficult decision. Wield the political knife to save his own skin or not. He answered that McSweeney question as he did because it’s the bit of truth he knows, he is there due to him.

Even if he does as wanted and gets rid of him he will look worse for turning and will be exposed and weakened that he may be out anyway.

Irren · 05/02/2026 10:37

Gobacktotheworld2 · 05/02/2026 09:44

One where my family can live together, and we make good wine.🍷 All I give a fuck about.

To return to my original point though, why the fuck does anyone think Starmer is trashing your country's reputation? Why do you imagine your reputation is so great

Clearly the poor desperate bastards braving la Manche in small boats think it's a Shangri-la... until they get there. But your average Fijian or Australian or Japanese or Singaporean, do you believe they admire your country and wish they lived there?

So hostile and angry. No, our reputation is not great of course. But it can always get worse. Like when we cut our aid budgets for instance.

EasternStandard · 05/02/2026 10:37

nomas · 05/02/2026 10:35

I'm guessing not, because like Trump, BoJo acting like a fool lets a right wing government get away with a lot.

You should have seen mn at the time. The same posters asking for this PM to stay were happy to see that one go. They were happy for the media to do that and now facing the same for Starmer. Live by the sword and all that.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.