Polling from More in Common released overnight:
Do you think that the following is true or false? Morgan McSweeney faked the theft of his phone in order to hide the messages between him and Peter Mandelson.
Definitely true
Probably true
Probably false
Definitely false
| 2024 vote | Def. true | Prob. true | Total true | Prob. false | Def. false |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 15% | 59% | 74% | 22% | 4% |
| Conservative | 22% | 58% | 80% | 17% | 3% |
| Labour | 15% | 55% | 70% | 24% | 5% |
| Lib Dem | 18% | 56% | 74% | 25% | 2% |
| Reform UK | 27% | 56% | 83% | 12% | 4% |
| Green Party | 15% | 67% | 82% | 15% | 3% |
Source: More in Common, March 2026
They’re not buying it…
Asked again and again, with no answer. Look at the glum faces on the frontbench…
Number 10 has claimed there was “no requirement” for Keir Starmer to formally interview Peter Mandelson before appointing him as ambassador to the US. The Times revealed last night that Starmer delegated the job entirely to Morgan McSweeney and Matthew Doyle. Don’t worry, the adults are back in the room…
The Downing Street spokesman told the Lobby briefing of press hacks this morning that the “full process that was in place at the time was followed“, and the PM has since “apologised to Epstein’s victims“. When asked if it might have been a good idea to at least chat to him for a second regardless of the ‘process’, the spokesman repeated the same line almost verbatim…
Featuring Hilary Benn staring at the floor wishing the ground would swallow him up…
Downing Street is insisting Mandelson’s £75,000 severance payout did not contradict the government’s own official guidance on public sector exit payouts, which makes clear payouts should not be used to soften reputational damage. Speaking at the Lobby briefing of press hacks this afternoon:
“[Mandelson’s payout was] Treasury-approved severance in line with standard HMT guidance and civil service practices…”
Right… here is the official guidance in question:
“Departments should not use special severance payments as an easy alternative to proper management action, e.g., to avoid difficult decisions, disciplinary processes, unwelcome publicity, or reputational damage.”
The Foreign Office’s HR boss Mark Power is quite clear in emails released in the Mandelson Files: “There is a potential, that absent a positive indication, Peter goes public on some of his claims so there is some urgency [to reach a settlement]”. Number 10 is now demanding Mandelson hands the cash over to charity, although admits it is ultimately ‘a matter for him’. So the odds of that happening are approximately zero…
Privy Council minutes from Tuesday have now been published regarding Peter Mandelson.
“An Order striking out The Lord Mandelson from the List of Members of His Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council.”
The Order in Council stripping Mandelson of his peerage has also been published:
Mandelson is no longer the Right Honourable…
The government is briefing that legislation to strip Mandelson of his peerage won’t come until after the King’s Speech in May. No10 says this is because it is putting together wider legislation to remove peers in general. A manufactured delay…
Speaking on Times Radio, former Home Secretary David Blunkett spoke about overdiagnosis of mental problems:
“Let’s distinguish those who are really severely mentally ill, diagnosed with things that require prolonged medical and diagnostic treatment. My wife and I talk about this a lot, because she’s a retired GP, about the fact that you can be sad without being ill. You can be momentarily depressed because your boyfriend or girlfriend’s just thrown you and you’re not mentally ill. You can even have mild issues, which can be dealt with with the right kind of support, but it doesn’t make you mentally ill. So we’ve got a real task, I think, to get the psychology, if you like, of this over. But there are things where you definitely need medical intervention, and there are other things where you need good friends, you need good connectivity, and you need a job.”
