Kevin Moore

[The Last Blairite #TrueLabour @LastBlairite]

Labour MPs turning off their replies whilst grovelling to Andy Burnham is because they’re being hammered by their own members. I genuinely can’t comprehend their tone deafness. A leadership contest might at least give Burnham a veneer of democratic choice.

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

Chris, there are rare occasions when an author dismantles his own argument before the reader has progressed beyond the opening paragraphs. This is one of them.

You readily concede that much of your reporting over recent months rested upon anonymous briefings, unnamed sources, private conversations and opinions offered only on condition that they could never be subjected to public scrutiny. You then ask your audience to accept that such material provides an accurate account of events. With respect, that is not evidence in any meaningful sense. It is an interpretation of events, constructed from assertions that the reader has no means of testing, verifying or challenging.

No serious observer disputes that confidential sources have a legitimate place in political journalism. They always have, and they always will. But there is a profound distinction between using anonymous sources to illuminate established facts and using them to construct an entire political narrative over many months. The former is responsible journalism; the latter risks becoming an exercise in reinforcing assumptions until they acquire the appearance of fact simply through constant repetition.

Indeed, your own article inadvertently exposes that very process. It repeatedly invites readers to accept what unnamed MPs supposedly believed, what unidentified advisers were allegedly saying, and what anonymous insiders privately thought. Such accounts may well have reflected genuine conversations, but they remain assertions rather than verifiable facts. There is an important distinction, and one that ought never to be blurred.

More striking still is the omission at the heart of your analysis. You devote thousands of words to explaining how Westminster concluded that Sir Keir Starmer's premiership had become untenable, yet you devote scarcely a sentence to examining whether the relentless stream of anonymous briefings and speculative commentary from sections of the political media played any part in creating that very outcome. That question surely deserves examination.

Nor do you grapple with the constitutional consequence of what follows. The British people elected a Government led by Sir Keir Starmer. Should he be replaced by another individual through internal parliamentary manoeuvring alone, the process may be constitutionally lawful, but that does not automatically confer political legitimacy in the eyes of the electorate. Those are two entirely different questions.

Many of those now defending such a transition were previously among the most vocal critics of Rishi Sunak for assuming office without seeking his own mandate from the country. Constitutional principles cannot be invoked when politically convenient and quietly abandoned when they become inconvenient.

History has a habit of punishing such inconsistency. If Andy Burnham were to become Prime Minister in these circumstances, I believe the pressure upon him to seek his own mandate from the British people would become irresistible. In my view, he would have little practical choice but to call a General Election within six to eight months. Whether Labour would survive such a contest is, of course, for the electorate to determine. My own judgement is that they would face a severe electoral reckoning, with the country returning either a Reform UK-led government or a hung Parliament.

Journalism should chronicle events, not become so intertwined with Westminster's internal conversations that it begins to mistake the mood of the political class for the settled will of the British people. That, in my view, is the fundamental weakness running through your analysis.

https://t.co/8vSBlsVlze

[The Rev. Anton Mittens 🌹👮🎓 @MittensOff]

Losing Makerfield was bad, but losing his Chief Fluffer Nick Ferrari, and his deputy, Julia Hartley Brewer in one day is huge. Who next Jacob Rees-Mogg, Chris Mason...? #Farage #ReformUK

[𐌁𐌉Ᏽ 𐌕𐌉𐌌𐌉 @OrevaZSN]

This is your friendly reminder that data centres don’t actually need water. They need a cooling system and are using water because it’s the cheapest way to do it.

[Paul Castle @Goto_paulcastle]

THE WORLD IS TAKING NOTICE
When leaders in Kyiv, Ottawa and across NATO thank Keir Starmer for his service, perhaps the question is no longer what Britain thought of him.
Perhaps the question is what the world saw in him.
Principle. Duty. Steadiness.
He rebuilt Labour, restored Britain's standing and strengthened our alliances in a dangerous world.
The loudest voices wrote the headlines.
History may write a different verdict.
#Labour #KeirStarmer #UKPolitics

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@FredThomasUK @AndyBurnhamGM Very disappointed with you Fred - it was thanks to Keir Starmer that you got it be an MP…or are you going down the Jess Phillips route of ‘in spite of Keir Starmer’?

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@WealthForG 9

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@KayBurley I expected more from you too

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@timfarron No he hasn't been a poor PM Tim

[April #StopReform @April200017]

No ambiguity from me.

I want Starmer to remain in post.

If needed I want Starmer to stand. No coronation.

I want to know who 350,000 Members want to lead them.

I want process followed.

I vote Starmer.

I want my voice heard. I am a Member.

Cut/paste/repost if agree

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@piersmorgan Hahaha. This is the man who claims to have won the war against Iran - can’t trust a word out of his lying mouth

[Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini) 🇺🇸🇺🇦 @AdamKinzinger]

Just refreshing this in everyone’s feed

[🇺🇸 Pamela Geller 🇮🇱 @PamelaGeller]

Watch Qatar snub Vance. So embarrassing.

[Hold The Line @LabHoldtheline]

A statment from us.

[Jacqui Pritchard 🇺🇦 Rejoin EU, SM&CU. #FBPE 💙 @jacquip537]

To @Keir_Starmer

I can list a thousand reasons why you should stay and fight, but one of the main reasons is that we need you! That simple. You have steered this country through very choppy waters, and you still have so much more to do. This has been orchestrated by those who

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@Keir_Starmer Please don’t step aside Prime Minister

[Crazy (Crikey!) Foxy @cels1952]

Apparently according to @guardian newspaper now Burnham has won a by-election, Starmer should stand aside for him to become PM. Does that mean, every future PM must stand aside for any new MP winning a by-election who has designs on his job? Anyone else find this ridiculous?

[Viviane: Members need a say @LaindonFEMINIST]

No ambiguity from me.

I want Starmer to remain in post.

If needed I want Starmer to stand. No coronation.

I want to know who 350,000 Members want to lead them.

I want process followed.

I vote Starmer.

I want my voice heard. I am a Member.

Cut/paste/repost if agree

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@bbclaurak I don’t believe a word you say

[Kevin Moore @Kitmankev]

@BethRigby You’re such a disappointment Beth