Are we all looking forward to David Lammy becoming PM?

[ProudAmberTurtle]

There's no way Starmer can survive this latest scandal.

Lord Mandelson failed his security vetting for the US ambassador job, but he still got the post anyway.

Starmer stood up in Parliament last September and insisted "full due process" was followed — three times.

He therefore either misled parliament and has to resign under the Ministerial Code, or his advisors have misled him and parliament, which is likely a criminal matter and suggests a level of almost unbelievable government incompetence or corruption.

What great things are you hoping this country will achieve under PM Lammy?

Departments are allowed to ‘overrule’ security vetting if they think they can manage the risk. Security vetting isn’t some kind of legal requirement with a clear pass/fail, it’s essentially a risk assessment that advises, it doesn’t stipulate what should be done. Departments can choose to accept the risk. It may have been a poor decision, but it doesn’t mean due process wasn’t followed.

I’m not condoning guessing slack passwords and having fun with a political opponent’s website. But attempting to blow this up is very try-hard.

The article makes clear what happened. It was not any attempt to impersonate somebody to get them into trouble, to steal information or hold data to ransom. Badenoch made some harmless mischief. She apologised and the apology was accepted. Badenoch wasn’t even an MP at the time.

Some Tories have done seriously bad things over the years, as have some Labour politicians. This wasn’t one of them.

She talked about it on Desert Island Discs. It was an honest answer to a daft question. A prank. You read the version on here and it’s so far removed you’d think it was espionage.

It’s not like someone found out the budget was accessible and released it as Reeves was speaking. It was a hi your password is bad.

Thats a fair enough post.

If its such a harmless jolly, why does it attract a fine and possibly a 2 year prison sentence (for minor offences)
KB was fortunate Harman accepted the apology.

It was a criminal offence even in 2008

I was reply to the pp who said Badenoch was trustworthy and honest & this is one example of her not being either.

Badenoch is constantly implying she wasn't in the last Tory Government, the latest was on Defence cuts, when told these all happened under the last Tory Govt, she replied with "i wasn't in that Govt for very long"

Yes Kemi, only 5 years in cabinet and endorsed the party manifesto, which promised to cut the infantry by 20k.

Shows how people buy and spread stuff

This made me laugh rather a lot.

Why?

And if it’s some sort of thing about another thread, deal with it there.

Interesting article on how Starmer will probably cling on for a few months yet (I know it's the Guardian, but it doesn't have much love for Stamer these days).

www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/17/labour-mps-keir-starmer-prime-minister

The role and obligations of a trustee is set out in statute and in common law and can't be excluded. So we can assume that certain standards would need to be met. A trustee has a fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries of a trust to act in the interests of the beneficiaries and to step down or not act if there is a conflict of interest. In this case there was a clear conflict of interest as she would be acting both as seller and trustee.

Incorrect advice given is no defence to a breach of fiduciary duty. If AR didn't understand that selling a share of a house to the trust for over its value was a breach of tbat fiduciary duty then she has no business being a hopeful for PM.

Proceedings may or may not be issued in due course.

No, nothing to do with the Epsom thread.

What an idiot.

Presumably you won't vote Labour either as they've been pretty inactive too on this subject.

How can I "take my evidence of fraud to the court" out of interest? Im not 100% I have standing, being a rando on the Internet. No, the case will have to be brought by the beneficiaries or the beneficiary's litigant in person as they are a child. Usually his parents....

Oh right so just a typical dig as per.

? It was nothing personal. Mumsnet is full of people "buying" and "spreading" stuff. Stuff that is completely untrue unlike the Kemi hacking story.

What do you mean by "as per"?

I shouldn’t think for a minute Lammy will be permanent PM. There would have to be a leadership vote. My view is that Streeting would get it.

Ok glad it wasn’t personal. Your post had the same tone as all the ones littered with laughing crying emojis each time. But since you meant generally I’ll retract the as per.

Because of the unions' involvement in choosing, I don't think he would (see: getting the wrong Milliband). I think still the wrong Milliband or Rayner are more likely due to this. The unions aren't known to vote for the Labour leader in a way which is best for the country, only in self-interest (so, I suppose, like many of the electorate!).

If they are, we can hold her to account then, can’t we 🤷‍♂️

So basically, you re just making things up? no evidence.

You can bring the matter to the attention of the Police in the case of fraud or bring a private prosecution if the CPS refuse to act.....

The Black belt barrister has said this morning that he thinks that if Labour try and get rid of Starmer, Starmer will call a GE and as that puts Labour MP's / Ministers jobs at risk they won't go for the vote of no confidence. It might still be possible if Kemi and Ed Davey combine forces.

anyonr who bring the real labour for working folks back

Following your logic, Lammy was Foreign Secretary when this occurred and it was the Foreign Office who did the vetting. Based on that alone, not a chance.

That seems a bit unlikely. Starmer would be burning down Labour out of spite. He’d turn the whole party against him, he knows that Labour would get slaughtered, and he wouldn’t be PM or leader - maybe not even an MP - after a GE held now, so why do it?

I think Starmer’s a prize fool and an unpleasant man, but I doubt he wants to go down in history as the Labour PM that destroyed the Labour Party.

I think Starmer’s a prize fool and an unpleasant man, but I doubt he wants to go down in history as the Labour PM that destroyed the Labour Party.

Given how (un)popular they are, I think he'll achieve that either with the long or short game.

I quite like the idea of Starmer saying fuck it and calling a GE now. Lance the boil. See how happy the public will be with Farage at the helm.