Angus Harron

Assistant Producer @bbcquestiontime
Broadcast Journalism MA @cityjournalism grad
RTs and likes ≠ endorsements or criticism - just saving posts for myself!

[Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford]

Could Ed Miliband succeed Keir Starmer?

Senior figures on the soft left say Angela Rayner just isn't up to it. There are concerns she would be a 'complete liability' - and that's before you get to the outstanding HMRC inquiry

Andy Burnham is struggling to find a seat. And even if he finds a seat, secures NEC approval and manages to win it - none of which is a given - he wouldn't be in Westminster for months

We reported today that Miliband has explicitly told Cabinet colleagues that he would be prepared to stand if Streeting triggered a contest. This was denied by those close to Miliband

But ministers are today saying that it will have to be him if Streeting goes over the top. The soft-left can only have one candidate, and at the moment he is the logical choice...

[Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer]

Taking our seats for the 1st time @Catherinewest1 & @wesstreeting

[BBC Sport @BBCSport]

“I said he’d be a world champion one day.” 🤝

A touch of class from Shaun Murphy, who congratulates Wu Yize on becoming world champion 🏆

[Ben Judah @b_judah]

I am, like most British Jews, growing really frustrated with this vague talk about “division and unity and hate.”

We have a very specific problem here. An IRGC cut out is recruiting disaffected Islamist-radicalised men, many long known to the police and negligently left ambling about, to a conduct a targeted intifada against the London Jewish community. And both our counter intelligence and counter terror forces are failing to intercept them.

I don’t need a mass London rally of well wishers or cultural luminaires to post their wishes — nice as that is — I need an actual security strategy to clamp down on this so my community can go about our lives in peace as is our absolute minimum right. And I need politicians to call the problem for what it is — not good vibes.

[Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford]

So it sounds like The Guardian's extraordinary story that Lord Mandelson failed his security vetting clearance but was overruled by the foreign office is broadly correct - some kind of statement is in the offing

It's not clear what that will say, but the line I've had from a few people is that No 10 was completely unaware - including Starmer. Cabinet Office's PET also said to be unaware. Which seems insane

Morgan McSweeney was said to be unaware. Mandelson himself was said to be unaware

If so it obviously poses big questions for the foreign office and particularly Olly Robbins, the permanent secretary

But most of all it poses questions for Starmer and his Number 10 operation.

The prime minister repeatedly told the Commons that 'full due process had been followed'.

He said that 'there was security vetting by the security services'

He told a press conference *explicitly* that 'security vetting... which is an intensive exercise... ***gave him [Mandelson] clearance for the role***'

[The New Statesman @NewStatesman]

WES STREETING: “I’M PRETTY FRUSTRATED”

Interview with @PronouncedAlva

Labour, languishing in the polls, is having a torrid time in office and a leadership contest is widely expected at some point in 2026. Privately, cabinet ministers barely pretend that the party isn’t in deep trouble. Over the course of our interview, Streeting doesn’t either. “I’m pretty frustrated, to be honest,” he tells me. “I feel like on one hand, since we’ve come into government, we’ve actually done a huge amount that we said we’d do… But that’s not reflected in the polls, and I don’t think it’s even reflected in our storytelling. I think we sell ourselves short.”

Labour is in danger of presenting itself as the “maintenance department for the country”, he says. “The problem with that kind of practical, technocratic approach is that if someone else comes along and says, ‘Well, I’ve got a maintenance company too, and mine’s cheaper,’ why wouldn’t people go, ‘OK, well, we’ll give that maintenance team a try’?” He doesn’t name Starmer, but the critique of the Prime Minister’s “practical, technocratic” leadership is clear.

[Rugby on TNT Sports @rugbyontnt]

"Everything I have done, it is not by my own doing..." 🥹

A powerful full-time interview with Siya Kolisi after he won his 100th Test cap in Paris tonight 🫶

[Office for National Statistics (ONS) @ONS]

In London, the average home was not affordable for any household income decile.

In three other regions (South East, East of England & South West), the average home was only affordable to the top decile.

Read more ➡️ https://t.co/T4qhXhiwX5

[Dan Neidle @DanNeidle]

It's shocking how much consensus there is amongst tax policy wonks and economists of Left and Right on the tax reforms the UK needs to boost growth & make the tax system fairer

More shocking: they're reforms that are never mentioned by any politicians

[James Marriott @j_amesmarriott]

Increasingly convinced any internet connection - even news and Google - is bad for concentration and focus so I'm very excited about this.

My new (or secondhand) Pomero DM250 e-typewriter. No internet, news, or social media. All it does is word processing.

[Robert Peston @Peston]

The entire story of Angela Rayner’s humiliating departure from government is that she failed to follow the recommendation and suggestion of two legal firms that she get expert opinion on the correct amount of stamp duty to pay when purchasing her apartment in Hove

[Henry Winter @henrywinter]

Manchester United’s descent to “Battered” and “Act of Cod” mockery at Blundell Park is rooted in a lack of leadership, on the field and off. Losing to a better motivated and managed Grimsby Town was a shock but not completely unexpected. United’s problem is their culture. There’s been a long erosion of the team-first, individual-second, responsibility-taking ethos of the Busby and Ferguson eras. The image of the current head coach hiding in the dug-out, too nervous to watch the shootout, encapsulated the lack of leadership. Stronger characters are needed. This isn’t new. There’s been a decade of decay from old high standards. 

It’s a problem that runs far deeper than one manager’s weakness when his players needed to look across from the centre circle and see a figure of defiance, standing there, supporting them, not cowering. It’s a problem at United that’s far deeper than Amorim’s rigid 3-4-2-1 that doesn’t suit many of the players, leaves midfield overrun, defence exposed and desecrates the club tradition of flying wingers.

It’s a problem deeper than a goalkeeper in Onana who has lost some of his old belief and whose uncertainty under high balls is ruthlessly targeted. United have lost their fear factor, their old aura of authority, so even League Two sides fancy their chances and take them. And Grimsby were excellent, showing all their leadership qualities particularly in the shootout. 

It’s cultural with United. So when players move away, they often flourish: Antony on loan at Betis, McTominay spectacularly at Napoli, and Garnacho will probably be a flying threat again if he escapes (possibly to Chelsea). What’s happening at United is not a story of bad players but bad culture and poor leadership.

Bruno Fernandes sums that up. Very good player, and he definitely cares but a leader? Arguing with officials rather than rallying his players. Loses his runner. Not a central midfielder btw, he’s a 10. So why not a back-four, double pivot, Mbeumo, Bruno, Cunha; Sesko? 4-2-3-1. Amorim obstinately refuses to adapt.

Amorim is not a bad manager. He proved his qualities at Sporting albeit under less pressure. He will surely be given time. United’s leadership team have much of their credibility tied up in him doing well. But Amorim needs to start acting like a leader in the dug-out and in interviews. He looks broken atm.

Good managers have come in after Ferguson and struggled. It’s the culture. It’s tied in with the Glazers. United became a commercial operation with a team attached. The culture became about what sone people could take out of the club, not what they could put in (Glazer supporters point to transfer spend but, come on, look at the debt, dividends and state of Old Trafford). A culture of selfishness affected some others. The focus was on money not so much the football. Recruitment too often involved overpaying for big names rather than strong characters. Hence this hybrid, high-priced, under-achieving squad. 

Ferguson retiring was obviously huge. Losing Gill’s leadership, experience of football and watchful eye at was also a massive blow. United lost their way. Plenty of well-paid marketing appointments. Not enough expertise in player recruitment.

Ratcliffe, in fairness, is trying to rectify damage done to the football department and culture during Glazer rule, inc £50m upgrade of Carrington and almost £200m spent on attack. But they urgently need a keeper (Lammens arriving, no pressure). Heaton v Burnley? He’d bring more communication and determination. But Tom’s 39. If only Henderson was still there. Where was the succession planning (as at LFC). United also need a quick, dominating midfielder.

Players must take responsibility. Maguire does. Cunha & Mbeumo have the right personality. But how many leaders do United have compared to 7/8 at LFC packed with national captains?
Some positives. Incredible support. Still the biggest club in the country. Still huge news. Hated, adored but never ignored. #MUFC

[Robert Colvile @rcolvile]

The @OBR_UK's new fiscal risks report, published today, is the most polite, spreadsheet-filled horror story you will ever read. It is the bureaucratic, non-partisan equivalent of grabbing our politicians by the lapels and screaming in their faces. It is very, very bad.

[Tom Waters @TomWatersEcon]

What do the changes to the UC & PIP bill do? Until an hour ago, it contained 3 major reforms:

❌Tighten PIP eligibility - saves £2.6bn in 2029-30
✅Cut health element of UC - saves £1.7bn
✅Raise basic UC - costs £1.8bn

If the first goes, the bill COSTS £0.1bn in 2029-30

[Robert Peston @Peston]

The underlying discontent among rebellious and even loyal Labour MPs stems from what many would say is a pathetically late discovery: that what’s driving so much government policy is Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules and the absolute power of the Office for Budget Responsibility in determining whether she is breaching those rules or not.

Any illusion that this isn’t the single most important driver of government decision-making was shattered today by the revealed contradiction between its establishment of a supposedly fundamental review led by disabilities minister Stephen Timms to shape new criteria for awarding Personal Independence Payments, while nonetheless sticking with the contradictory stipulation that from November next year no one will be eligible for PIP if they don’t score four points on one of PIP’s existing criteria.

It is absurd and illogical to characterise Timms’s review as the face of humane reform while simultaneously saying that this new four-point rule based on existing criteria will willy-nilly come into effect next year.

So what’s really going on?

The work and pensions secretary’s unspoken reason for sticking to the four-point reform is that without it, and under the OBR-assessed fiscal rules, Reeves would have to fill a £5bn hole in her finances in the autumn’s budget, and not the £2.5bn hole created by Kendall’s partial welfare-reform climb down.

That is a big difference when it comes to any taxes Reeves may have to raise or any spending she may have to cut.

So a growing number of Labour MPs see this subservience to the OBR and the fiscal rules as just the stupidest motivation for making today’s decisions that affect the lives of the most fragile of UK citizens - decisions that will, on the government’s own calculations, shift 150,000 vulnerable people into poverty.

These MPs were bitten once by the OBR dog when Reeves chose to means-test the winter fuel allowance as proof of her fealty to the OBR’s jurisdiction over her own fiscal rules. With the disability reforms, many of them now feel twice shy.

They don’t ask why a Labour government respects the OBR, especially after the Truss/Kwarteng fiscal debacle caused by their disrespect for the OBR.

But they do question why the Chancellor and Treasury endow the OBR with an almost mystical ability to determine which policies are sensible and why Reeves has seemingly abdicated responsibility for trying to sell the government’s initiatives to the country’s creditors independently of the OBR and fiscal rules straitjacket.

So whatever the outcome of the vote tomorrow on the welfare reforms, Reeves and Starmer are now under enormous pressure - probably irresistible pressure - to lose their OBR religion.

[Paul Johnson @PJTheEconomist]

Worth keeping this chart in mind when considering NHS resources. Very, very big increases in numbers of hospital doctors and nurses between first half of 2019 and first half of 2024. Much smaller increase in measured activity.

[Andrew Neil @afneil]

The current yield on 10-year gilts (UK bonds) is 4.65% v peak of 4.42% during the ClusterTruss
The current yield on 30-year gilts is 5.25% v peak of 5.12% during the ClusterTruss.
So UK government now paying more to borrow (and has been for sometime) than during ClusterTruss.
Yet Starmer/Reeves claim they’ve ‘fixed’ the economy, which is ‘improving’.

[PGA TOUR @PGATOUR]

This is the swing of Canadian legend Moe Norman.

Sam Snead called Norman golf’s greatest striker of the ball.

Tiger Woods said Moe Norman and Ben Hogan were the only two golfers in history who truly “owned” their swings.

A list of accolades by Moe Norman:
• 50 Canadian tournament wins
• 7 Canadian PGA Championships
• 17 holes-in-one
• Made 30 of 37 cuts in PGA TOUR-sanctioned events
• 40+ course records
• 59 on three different courses
• 2 Masters appearances
• Inducted into Canadian Golf Hall of Fame in 1995
• Inducted into Canadian Sports Hall of Fame in 2006

[Dan Neidle @DanNeidle]

Starmer is correct. We can't tax our way to growth.

But we can *tax reform* our way to growth. Some ideas:

[Paul Johnson @PJTheEconomist]

Really important to understand this. Talk of “austerity” is way overblown in context of what govt announced in October and by comparison with stated plans of last govt. Had they implemented those plans (unlikely) that really would have looked like austerity.