PMQs – snap verdict
That is the first PMQs that Kemi Badenoch can clearly be said to have “won”. She has held her own with Keir Starmer quite often, but in any discussion on domestic policy she is at a colossal disadvantage, because the record of the previous Tory government is so poor. Even a first-rate parliamentarian would struggle with the deck of cards she has been dealt, and she is not in that league.
But today Badenoch had an easy target, and she clobbered it effectively. As Tony Blair discovered (twice – there were two resignations), defending Peter Mandelson is sometimes just impossible. Both of those incidents involved Mandelson’s dealings with the wealthy, but by the standards of today’s scandals they were relatively innocuous. Jeffrey Epstein’s moral depravity was on a wholly different scale. No wonder Starmer was wriggling.
Badenoch started by asking Starmer what he knew about the Mandelson/Epstein friendship when he appointed him ambassador to the US. Starmer brushed this off with a routine answer about due process, and Badenoch then followed that up with a reference to a complicated story in today’s Telegraph about Epstein being consulted by Mandelson over the sale of a business part owned by the UK government, when Mandelson was dealing with it in his capacity as business secretary and after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences. She said:
The Daily Telegraph reports today, that while Lord Mandelson was business secretary, he brokered a deal with Jeffrey Epstein, while he was business secretary. And that this occurred after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences. Given this new information, does the prime minister really think it is tenable for our ambassador to remain in post?
Starmer continued to rely on the “due process” defence, but it was not really working and eventually he resorted to accusing Badenoch of messing up her questions last week, when she failed to interrogate him much on Angela Rayner. Starmer’s best moment came in his final answer.
Our deputy leader contest started this week and ends on October 25. Their leadership contest has been going on for months.
But by then the damage had been done.
Does this matter much? It is hard to say at this point. Mandelson isn’t ambassador to the Vatican. He was appointed to establish a good relationship with Donald Trump, who isn’t an Epstein-type paedophile sex trafficker but who isn’t a moral paragon either, and by all accounts Mandelson is doing that part of the job remarkably well.
But the Epstein association is utterly corrosive. (Even Trump, who is shameless in most things, can recognise this, which presumably is why he has been willing to defy his Maga base over the Epstein files.) Starmer did not sound overly-supportive of Mandelson, and so it is possible a slew of further revelations could cut short his Washington career. If that were to happen, Badenoch would claim the scalp.
Key events
RMT leader urges Sadiq Khan to convene summit to resolve London Tube strike
The leader of striking Tube workers has called for a summit to try to resolve a dispute over pay and working hours, PA Media reports. PA says:
Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union (RMT) are taking industrial action this week which has crippled London Underground services, causing travel chaos in the capital.
RMT general secretary Eddie Dempsey called on the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, to attend a summit with the union in a bid to find a resolution.
Speaking at the TUC Congress in Brighton, Dempsey told delegates: “I’ve got a message for the mayor. Instead of going on social media, instead of the old tired cliches, telling trades unionists to get round the table, you’re the mayor of London, you’re the chair of Transport for London. Stop going on social media, invite us to the meeting, let’s have a discussion, because I want to know what is going on in London.”
Dempsey warned of more strike action if there was no resolution to the dispute, adding: “We take no pleasure in causing disruption but we make no apology for fighting for our members. So if the mayor has any sense, he will reach out to us.”
The union has rejected a 3.4% pay offer and is campaigning for a cut in their members’ 35-hour week, which London Underground says is unaffordable.
Israeli president Isaac Herzog defends attack on Hamas in Qatar ahead of meeting with Starmer
Patrick Wintour
Patrick Wintour is the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The Foreign Office was forced to deny the UK was rolling out the red carpet for Isaac Herzog, the Israeli president, on his visit to London as Herzog contradicted Keir Starmer by saying Tuesday’s attacks on the Hamas leadership in Qatar were part of a drive for peace.
Starmer had said the attacks set back the cause of peace, but Herzog insisted the aim had been to take out those in the Hamas leadership most consistently opposed to a ceasefire.
Despite the government insisting Herzog was in the UK only on a private visit, he is having meetings not just with Starmer but with the foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, as well as delivering an address to the thinktank Chatham House.
The Foreign Office defended the ministerial meetings saying the aim was to impress on Herzog the need to increase aid, but also to do more to allow the evacuation to Britain from Gaza of injured children and fully-funded scholarship students.
Protesters demanded Herzog’s arrest as a war criminal as they demonstrated outside Downing Street and Herzog’s hotel.
Faced by allegations of violating the sovereignty of Qatar and undermining efforts to secure a ceasefire, Herzog hit back in a briefing to reporters saying that the strike on senior Hamas figures in Doha on Tuesday was designed to bring the war to an end. Herzog identified Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya as the chief barrier to peace. Reporters were told:
We targeted those who refused to accept the deal – primarily Khalil al-Hayya, who was the head of Hamas. He kept on being the objector. He refused adamantly to get to a deal. He kept on saying ‘no’, or ‘yes, but’ – and the ‘but’ was impossible to overcome.
His conditions could never be met. He was one of the instigators and perpetrators of October 7, and I guess the Americans can confirm it.
Herzog’s claim that it is Hamas’ foreign-based leadership, rather than militants in Gaza, holding back a peace deal is not a universally shared analysis.
British ministers said they were backing an emergency session of the UN security council today where Israel will be challenged to prove how the attack on Doha met the two legal tests to justify such attacks – self-defence and imminence of an attack. A call between the foreign ministers from France, Germany and the UK is also expected.
At PMQs Starmer defended the encounter with Herzog telling MPs:
I will be clear that restrictions on aid must be lifted. The offensive in Gaza must stop and settlement building must cease. But however difficult the UK will not walk away from a diplomatic solution. We will negotiate and we will strain every sinew, because that is the only way to get the hostages out, to get aid in and to stop the killing.
Culture secretary Lisa Nandy accuses GB News of presenting ‘political polemic’ as news
Michael Savage
Michael Savage is the Guardian’s media editor.
Lisa Nandy has accused GB News of presenting “political polemic” as news by allowing politicians like Nigel Farage to front its shows, as she warned a “polarised and fragmented” news media was threatening democracy.
The culture secretary said ministers “intend to act” over what she described as a blurring of news and political attack. It comes with media regulator Ofcom already looking to tighten the rules around politicians presenting current affairs programmes.
Speaking to the Commons culture committee, Nandy said that while there had been recent criticisms of the BBC, there were “different standards being observed in other places”. She said concerns had been raised with her over Farage’s GB News outings.
She went on:
To take a very clear example, and something that this government and I feel very strongly about, there is a real importance for the public when they look at the news to be able to understand whether what they’re seeing is political polemic or news. At the moment, that situation is currently completely unsatisfactory.
I’ve had particular concerns raised with me by parliamentarians about the appearance of Nigel Farage presenting news programmes on GB News. I think that is a fair criticism from members of parliament of all political parties, because the public have a right to know if what they’re seeing is news and is impartial, or is not.
She said it was fuelling the breakdown in trust in news generally, with the consumption of news now “polarised and fragmented”.
She said it had become “a very dangerous position for a country to be in, and it’s something that we intend to robustly defend”.
TUC unanimously backs call for government to repeal ban on Palestine Action
Haroon Siddique
Haroon Siddique is the Guardian’s legal affairs correspondent.
The Trades Union Congress (TUC) annual Congress has unanimously passed a motion calling on the government to repeal the ban on Palestine Action.
The motion calls on the UK government to “repeal the authoritarian proscription of Palestine Action under counter-terrorism laws”. The ban, the first of a direct action protest group, came into force on 5 July, placing Palestine Action alongside organisations like Islamic State and National Action.
The government’s decision has been criticised as draconian by UN experts, Amnesty International, Liberty and hundreds of lawyers, including a former director of public prosecutions.
Speaking in the debate at the congress in Brighton, Martin Cavanagh, the president of PCS union, which represents hundreds of thousands of civil servants, said:
The UK government’s proscription of Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 is not just a legal manoeuvre comrades, it is a political attack with implications for our rights, our members and our democracy.
We believe this proscription represents a significant abuse of counter-terrorist powers and a direct attack on our right to protest against the genocidal Israeli regime. Let’s be clear: protest is not and can never be classed as terrorism. Solidarity is not a crime, and silence in the face of injustice is not an option.
The motion, proposed by the National Education Union (NEU), also called on the UK government to take meaningful action to secure an immediate ceasefire, immediately recognise the state of Palestine and end arms trade with Israel as well as all trade which assists violations of international law.
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries, which has been organising protests at which hundreds of people have been arrested for declaring support for Palestine Action, said:
The government should listen to trade unions and 5.5 million workers they represent, as well as the countless vicars, protests, war veterans, retired doctors, nurses and teachers and Holocaust survivors and their descendants being rounded up by police. This is Labour’s poll tax moment. A law this unjust and facing such widespread public opposition cannot hold and will inevitably have to be lifted.
John Healey, the defence secretary, has said Nato allies will “stand firm” against Russian aggression.
Speaking after a meeting with counterparts from Poland, Italy, France and Germany (who, with the UK, comprise the E5), he said:
Together, we the E5 totally condemn these attacks.
Russia’s actions are reckless, they’re dangerous, they’re unprecedented.
We see what Putin is doing. Yet again he is testing us. Yet again we will stand firm.
Photograph: Kin Cheung/AP
MPs condemn Israeli attack on Hamas in Qatar, and Starmer’s decision to meet Herzog in No 10
Kiran Stacey
Kiran Stacey is the Guardian’s policy editor.
MPs from all sides condemned the Israeli attack on Hamas in Qatar during an urgent question in the Commons, with several criticising the prime minister for pressing ahead with his plans to meet Isaac Herzog, the Israeli president.
Abtisam Mohamed, the Labour backbencher, asked:
Why are we meeting Israel’s President Herzog today when his own words, and those of Prime Minister Netanyahu show a complete disregard for international humanitarian law?”
Kim Johnson, another Labour MP, referred to comments by Herzog in October 2023, when the Israeli president claimed “the entire [Palestinian] nation out there” was responsible for the 7 October attacks.
How does the minister justify the genocidal comments of President Herzog?
These individuals must be held accountable. This is not diplomacy, it is shameful complicity … Today’s meeting with Herzog should never have taken place.
Even MPs loyal to Starmer urged the prime minister to use his meeting with Herzog to condemn the Israeli government and its action in Qatar.
Emily Thornberry, the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, who is also running for the deputy leadership of the Labour party, said:
There is an emboldened far-right Israeli govt who believe they can do whatever they like and there won’t be any consequences … In what way will the prime minister be able to convey such a message to President Herzog this afternoon?”
Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader at Westminster, said:
Today of all days, after an illegal attack on peace brokers Qatar, it is shocking to see the UK put out the red carpet for President Herzog, who dehumanised Palestinian suffering and incited violence against civilians.
Hamish Falconer, the Middle East minister, defended the visit, saying Starmer would use it to talk about practical concerns such as evacuating civilians from Gaza and getting aid into the region.
President Herzog is the head of state. He is not a functional part of the government, he is an important conduit to raise these concerns.
The foreign secretary sought this morning amongst other things to ensure greater support from the Israeli government in order to get children with injuries, in order to get students out. These are difficult, practical matters on which we are focused.
Tories claim Starmer has ‘put party above national security’ by keeping Mandelson in post
A Conservative party spokesperson issued this statement after PMQs.
Keir Starmer was in complete disarray at PMQs.
There are clearly questions he refuses to answer, because it appears he knew that Peter Mandelson had an intimate relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, and still chose to appoint him to one of our country’s most important diplomatic and economic roles.
The prime minister has put his party, and his friend Mandelson above our national security. Only full transparency will now suffice. Starmer must immediately publish all documents related to Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
The claim that having Mandelson remain as ambassador to the US could compromise national security echoes what Ed Davey suggested at PMQs when he asked if the White House had further “compromising material” on Mandelson that could, Davey implied, by used by Donald Trump as leverage. (See 12.23pm.)
John Healey, the defence secretary, is holding a press conference after a meeting with his counterparts from France, Germany, Italy and Poland. There is a live feed here.
No 10 says Mandelson subject to ‘extensive’ vetting before appointment as ambassador to US
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson would not discuss in detail what Keir Starmer knew about Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein before he appointed him ambassador to Washington. But he stressed that the pre-appointment vetting was “extensive” – implying No 10 did know quite a lot about this.
The spokesperson said:
We have been very clear that the victims of Jeffrey Epstein are at the forefront of our minds, he was a despicable criminal who committed the most heinous crimes and destroyed the lives of so many women and girls.
On the appointment process, any candidates for ambassador positions are subject to extensive vetting and background checks by the Foreign Office and Cabinet Office as a matter of course.
Asked if Starmer was surprised by the latest revelations, the spokesperson said that Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein “has been a matter of public record for some time and the ambassador himself has repeatedly addressed questions on it”.
I have beefed up the earlier posts with the exchanges between Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch at PMQs with much fuller, direct quotes. To get the updates to show, you may need to refresh the page.
PMQs – snap verdict
That is the first PMQs that Kemi Badenoch can clearly be said to have “won”. She has held her own with Keir Starmer quite often, but in any discussion on domestic policy she is at a colossal disadvantage, because the record of the previous Tory government is so poor. Even a first-rate parliamentarian would struggle with the deck of cards she has been dealt, and she is not in that league.
But today Badenoch had an easy target, and she clobbered it effectively. As Tony Blair discovered (twice – there were two resignations), defending Peter Mandelson is sometimes just impossible. Both of those incidents involved Mandelson’s dealings with the wealthy, but by the standards of today’s scandals they were relatively innocuous. Jeffrey Epstein’s moral depravity was on a wholly different scale. No wonder Starmer was wriggling.
Badenoch started by asking Starmer what he knew about the Mandelson/Epstein friendship when he appointed him ambassador to the US. Starmer brushed this off with a routine answer about due process, and Badenoch then followed that up with a reference to a complicated story in today’s Telegraph about Epstein being consulted by Mandelson over the sale of a business part owned by the UK government, when Mandelson was dealing with it in his capacity as business secretary and after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences. She said:
The Daily Telegraph reports today, that while Lord Mandelson was business secretary, he brokered a deal with Jeffrey Epstein, while he was business secretary. And that this occurred after Epstein had been convicted of child sex offences. Given this new information, does the prime minister really think it is tenable for our ambassador to remain in post?
Starmer continued to rely on the “due process” defence, but it was not really working and eventually he resorted to accusing Badenoch of messing up her questions last week, when she failed to interrogate him much on Angela Rayner. Starmer’s best moment came in his final answer.
Our deputy leader contest started this week and ends on October 25. Their leadership contest has been going on for months.
But by then the damage had been done.
Does this matter much? It is hard to say at this point. Mandelson isn’t ambassador to the Vatican. He was appointed to establish a good relationship with Donald Trump, who isn’t an Epstein-type paedophile sex trafficker but who isn’t a moral paragon either, and by all accounts Mandelson is doing that part of the job remarkably well.
But the Epstein association is utterly corrosive. (Even Trump, who is shameless in most things, can recognise this, which presumably is why he has been willing to defy his Maga base over the Epstein files.) Starmer did not sound overly-supportive of Mandelson, and so it is possible a slew of further revelations could cut short his Washington career. If that were to happen, Badenoch would claim the scalp.
Liz Twist (Lab) says it is suicide prevention day. How is the government tackling this issue?
Starmer starts by thanking Twist for her work as his parliamentary private secretary. (That implies she has been replaced in the reshuffle, but the government has not made an announcement about PPSs. Chris Ward, who was Starmer’s other PPS, was made a Cabinet Office minister at the weekend.)
On suicide, he says the government will work with all MPs
Sarah Bool (Con) says it is ‘Back British farming’ day. She asks the government to reverse the inheritance tax for farm.
Starmer says the government has struck a deal with the EU of great benefit for farmers.
Starmer says Reform UK adviser who has linked vaccines to cancer shows why party ‘cannot be trusted with NHS’
Starmer condemns Reform UK from taking advice from an expert who has made “shocking and baseless claims that vaccines are linked to cancer”. He goes on:
These dangerous conspiracies cost lives, but it shows that Reform cannot be trusted with our NHS.
Carla Denyer (Green) says the government should ban “Israeli arms dealers from parading their Gaza-tested weapons on UK soil”.
Starmer says there are clear rules in relation to arms sales.
Starmer defends engaging with Israel, saying refusing to do so would be student politics
Stephen Flynn (SNP) asked why the Israeli president was being invited to Downing Street. He said Isaac Herzog was someone who “called for the collective punishment of the Palestinian people and who signed the artillery shells that destroyed their homes, their families and their friends”.
Starmer replied:
We have suspended arms that could be used in Gaza. We have sanctioned extremists. We suspended trade talks.
But the point he raised is a very serious one. We all want an outcome that ensures peace, that the hostages get out, that aid gets in under a two-state outcome. It is the only way we will get peace in a region that has suffered conflict for a very, very long time. I will not give up on diplomacy – that is the politics of students.
Davey asks Starmer if White House has more ‘compromising material’ on Mandelson that US could use to influence him
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, urges Starmer to reduce the bureaucracy faced by family carers when they are looking for help from the government.
Starmer agrees this should be simplified.
Davey asks about Mandelson, and asks if Starmer has asked him if there is any other compromising information that could be used against him.
Starmer says due process was followed with the appointment.
UPDATE: Davey said:
Lord Mandelson has admitted to continuing his relationship long after Epstein was convicted, and there are more embarrassing details we don’t yet know.
People will be surprised by the prime minister giving ambassador Mandelson such strong support today.
Has the prime minister asked the ambassador what other compromising material the Trump administration might have on him, as he leads Britain’s negotiations with the White House?
And Starmer replied:
A full due process was gone through when the appointment was made.
Badenoch says Starmer has an ambasador “mired in scandal”. And she says the government should be using Tory minimum service legislation to reduce the impact of the strikes. She says all the Labour deputy leadership contests have been trying to please the unions.
Starmer says the Tory leadership contest has been going on for months.
UPDATE: Badenoch said:
A load of waffle and whataboutery. All they are interested [in] right now is their pointless deputy leadership election while the country is out there suffering from an economic crisis.
The prime minister has an ambassador mired in scandal, not focusing on Nato. He lost his deputy prime minister [Angela Rayner] just last week for evading taxes. He’s got a new home secretary [Shabana Mahmood], a new foreign secretary [Yvette Cooper] just learning the ropes, not able to help with this issue.
We have strikes crippling our capital city and damaging our economy …
Isn’t the link between all of this his bad decisions his bad judgment and his total weakness?
And Starmer replied:
Our deputy leader contest started this week and ends on October 25. Their leadership contest has been going on for months …
All this noise from the arsonist whilst we’re putting out the fires that that they left behind.
