“Oh they needed an operator!” They literally had someone already there who the White House asked to keep in post and they put their mate in there instead.

Yes, this is one of the most pervasive myths of the whole business, that it was to appease Trump. Total bollocks.

BREAKING - Robbins says that there was a "live debate" prior to his employment about whether Mandelson should undergo any vetting whatsoever before he was appointed as ambassador.

How at risk is Keir Starmer?

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

The big difference - people tell me - is that he hated being Loto and he enjoys being prime minister.

How safe is Starmer’s premiership after his Mandelson vetting statement to MPs? Despite his explanation and the need for political stability, the PM is still unpopular – and Olly Robbins has yet to give his side of the story

One MP described Starmer as having a chronic case of “good guy” syndrome.

But he was part of creating the imperative which led to the overruling of so many warnings. “Appoint this man at all costs – but not like that!”

My analysis - on how safe the PM really is

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

It all comes back to 'you really do need to have a prime minister to run this thing'.

MPs are furious about this - especially the quotes from Epstein victims.

What is ‘DV’? Key acronyms and terms in the Mandelson vetting row explained Phrases used by the UK’s national security apparatus have been thrown into the spotlight by the political controversy

your cut-out-and-keep guide to all the key terms in the Mandelson saga

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

I am certain - for what it's worth - if all we now know about Mandelson's associations with Epstein was known then, he wouldn't have been appointed. But that's not the question.

Several senior civil servants I have spoken to simply do not believe No10 would have cancelled the appointment even if they had known. I'm sure Starmer thinks in his own mind now that he would have done. But given what we know of the appointment process, is he being honest with himself?

He can say *now* that he would not have appointed him. But is this not the return of Captain Hindsight? Much of what was a red flag in the vetting he had signalled he was prepared to overlook. There was a lot of signal also coming from No10 that this was an imperative political appointment.

I suppose it will come down to whether you believe Starmer would not have appointed Mandelson if he knew he failed the vetting.

He was prepared to overlook all the issues already flagged by the Cabinet Office. If they were the same issues, would he really have said, actually let's cancel it?

Starmer- “That I wasn’t told that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting when he was appointed is staggering.

“That I wasn’t told that he had failed security vetting when I was telling Parliament that due process had been followed is unforgiveable.”

Honestly, this is the most plausible explanation anyone had come up with

“High risk, high reward” - remind me again, what was the reward meant to look like?

Why did they get it in their heads that this was such an important thing to achieve that it required defying all doubt and convention?

If you step back, it is truly extraordinary that so many people went to such great lengths and broke so many conventions and risked their political careers and the only outcome of all these efforts and risks was appointing a washed-up old spinner to an ambassadorial post

Revealed: Mandelson failed vetting but Foreign Office overruled decision Guardian investigation uncovers decision by UK security officials to deny clearance before Mandelson took up role as US ambassador

BREAKING - Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting clearance but the decision was overruled by the Foreign Office

Investigation from Paul Lewis, @direthoughts.com and @pippacrerar.bsky.social

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

UK economy showed surprise 0.5% growth before Iran war ONS figure for February suggests Britain was gaining momentum before conflict dashed hopes of recovery

You can see why Rachel Reeves seemed quite cross yesterday

www.theguardian.com/business/202...

Boosting military spending by slashing welfare is not the answer, senior Labour figures warn Reeves MPs and peers say pitting defence and welfare against each other risks losing public support for increased spending on the military

Senior Labour figures have warned that Rachel Reeves must find alternative ways to increase military spending rather than slashing welfare, saying it risks diminishing public support for investment in defence.

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

Quite a flex to turn up at the presidential palace, get him to confirm you as prime minister, call him unfit to serve with no moral authority, tell him to resign, and then pose for a picture

‘Field of Dreams stuff’: will Leeds finally get its trams after decades of promises? Plans for return of such transport have been discussed for years, and not all local people believe that service will come

Great piece on our white whale - the Leeds tram

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026...

Andrew Lewin (@andrewlewinmp) This essay was first published by the Fabian society as part of a collection of Labour Thinks Essays, I would encourage you to read the full collection at the link below. This is my contribution. http...

3/3
This is about more than the technicalities of a UK/Swiss style deal.

I believe it falls on this generation of Labour MPs, and this Labour
government to rebuild our alliances and reimagine what is
possible in our relationship with the EU.

The full essay is here
substack.com/profile/3292...

Group of Labour MPs proposes new policies to beat rightwing populism Policies include a Swiss-style EU deal, lower electricity prices and reduced dependence on the US

2/3 Thank you to @jessicaelgot.bsky.social for covering.

As Jess says, my essay looks at the UK/EU relationship.

Immigration is falling sharply & 2026 is very different to 2024.
The case for a Swiss style access to the single market becomes stronger each day.

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

Mahmood’s migration changes will deliver fraction of claimed savings, data suggests Exclusive: Analysis of government figures indicates public finances will gain £600m not £10bn if migrants’ access to benefits is reduced

Shabana Mahmood’s migration changes are expected to save just £600m – about 6% of the £10bn the home secretary claimed, according to the government’s own data.

FOI data was obtained by @jdportes.bsky.social

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026...

Nothing else matters this week!!!

EasyJet leaves 122 passengers behind due to EU entry-exit system chaos Exclusive: Of the 156 passengers booked on easyJet flight from Milan to Manchester, only 34 boarded

Brexit benefits latest www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-...

Fair to say Trump hasn’t had the Midas touch when it comes to international endorsements

“Hungary has chosen Europe… A country reclaims its European path,” says VDL