Thank you to those who support my work every week, it means a lot. If you like my breakdowns of the big stories of the week and analysis of how news and social media interact, please consider supporting my work with a paid subscription.

Subscribe now

New prime minister Andy Burnham has been recapping his Brat summer for MPs this week as he faced the Commons for the first time in the top job.

In a statement to the Commons on Tuesday, Burnham highlighted tax cuts on electricity bills and business rates for pubs and clubs, along with other measures to give the public “breathing room” on costs.

At PMQs yesterday, Burnham faced off against the leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, who quizzed him on how he plans to fund his promises made so far and whether he’ll be increasing taxes. The PM hit back that his government will be “grounded in fiscal responsibility” and that he plans to get the welfare bill down through a focus on improving training and education, adding he wants to work with the Conservatives on this.

Burnham has pledged repeatedly to focus on “problem solving over point scoring”.

And yet as his exchange with Badenoch continued, Burnham began trotting out some of Keir Starmer’s greatest hits. When Badenoch focused on the soaring government borrowing costs - which are at an 18-year high, in part due to the Iran war - Burnham hit back by highlighting the “14 years of stagnant growth” under the Tories, Liz Truss’s mini-budget and Brexit. He said any turbulence now is because of what “they left behind”.

Badenoch accused Burnham of being someone who “wants to say yes to everyone”.

She said that it’s “delightful he wants to make people happy but he needs to be a leader, not a people pleaser”.

On tax and spending, Burnham insisted he wouldn’t be drawn on what might be in the chancellor’s budget in October. He insists all of his moves so far have been “fully funded”.

Burnham’s popularity remains strong - certainly better than his predecessor at the same stage of his premiership and stronger than any other party leader. A More in Common poll this week placed Reform in third place, with Labour in first, while a YouGov poll showed a very close heat between the three most popular parties. Labour MPs will point to this as a sign they made the right call to bin Keir Starmer.

But challenges lie ahead.

The rising cost of borrowing means chancellor John Healey has less headroom in the budget. Meanwhile he’s under pressure to hit the target of spending three per cent of GDP on defence by 2030 - an issue that led him to resign as defence secretary under Starmer.

Burnham has made popular changes to the prison early release scheme, exempting those guilty of manslaughter from release to keep the killers of PC Andrew Harper behind bars. However thousands of prisoners, including those guilty of stalking and domestic abuse, will go free under the scheme in October. Burnham’s changes to the early release scheme means he’s freeing up less space in a system that is at 98 per cent capacity - if any extreme event occurs, such as mass rioting, then this will create “stresses and strains”, a former justice secretary warned.

It’s important to note the problems in prisons are not Burnham’s doing. The Conservatives failed to create enough spaces in jails for years. However the consequences are now his to own.

One of the big decisions he has taken is to end indefinite jail terms. These were scrapped in 2012, however some people handed imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences before then remain in jail today. As of June, 856 people remain behind bars with IPPs. A further 1,415 people have been recalled to custody after being released on licence. Critics of Burnham’s decision say that many of these people remain in prison because parole boards deem them unsafe for release. However campaigners have welcomed the move.

Lord John Thomas, who served as Lord Chief Justice from 2013 to 2017, told The Independent: “The sentence was an aberration that’s been used to justify a continued status of preventative detention and that’s what it is.”

Burnham has already made popular decisions and faced some difficult ones. He’s made many people feel better about politics, but the biggest challenges are yet to come.

• There’s a podcast series about IPPs called Trapped which is worth a listen if you want to know more about IPP sentences.

  The News List by Vicky Smith is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Armchair detectives hunt for true crime twists in Lindsay Clancy case

The trial of a Massachusetts nurse accused of murdering her three children after strangling them in 2023 has divided opinion in the US and beyond.

While the criminal trial has focused on whether Lindsay Clancy, 36, can be held criminally responsible for killing her children, or if she was in the grip of postpartum psychosis that meant she was responding to “command hallucinations”, outside the courtroom very different conversations have been happening.

The legal case around the killings of Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months, has captured attention for a wide spectrum of reasons. Some of those following the case are incredulous that Lindsay could be anything other than guilty of first degree murder, saying even with a mental illness she retained free will. Meanwhile, hundreds of women wearing pink have gathered outside the Plymouth County courtroom to signal solidarity with her. Many are speaking out because they can relate to feeling mentally unwell, exhausted and under-supported as new mothers. The case has sparked renewed criticism of the treatment available to mothers after birth.

But there’s another thread to the conversation about Lindsay.

I have had multiple conversations online in the last month with people convinced that Lindsay’s husband Patrick Clancy, a software salesman, either drugged her into a state of confusion that caused her to act or that he carried out the killings himself.

I find it fascinating that people on social media are having an entirely different conversation about the Lindsay Clancy case compared to the conversation that has happened in the actual courtroom. The courtroom discussion has focused on medications, treatments, decisions taken by medics, diagnoses, decision-making and mental capacity, while outside it’s been about motive and relationships.

This strikes me as a sign of our times, where a horrific criminal case is being consumed by an audience obsessed with true crime and creators cherry-pick tidbits or outliers to play detective. Some are doing their own research online to prove Patrick met his now-wife while married to Lindsay - which one could argue creates motive, but not evidence of guilt. Either way, no evidence has been presented of Patrick having an affair. Others are re-enacting Lindsay’s suicide attempt using Bratz dolls and a model of her bedroom.

You only have to look at the documentary and true crime drama content being churned out by Netflix and others to see how rabid the appetite is for this type of conversation-starting content. The bigger the stakes and macabre detail in the case, the better the show does. The Death of the Pastor’s Wife is one such example, recently released by Netflix that has topped the streaming service’s chart.

And look, I totally get it, because I watch these shows too. But I also wonder whether we have lost some of the ability to distinguish between fact and feeling. When an investigation does change direction with a shock twist, as often happens in these top performing Netflix documentaries, it does so because new evidence changed what investigators think happened. In the Lindsay Clancy case, people are basing their theories on what they feel happened, and working backwards to force the evidence to fit that.

Cases of mothers killing their children are not unheard of but they are rare. It is difficult to fathom how any mother, especially one who the evidence shows was loving and desperate to be mentally well, could harm her children. It is easier and more comfortable for some to blame the man, because that would make more sense for this to be a calculated, cold, abusive crime.

For armchair detectives there has also been plenty of pieces of the puzzle to pick apart and analyse.

That is in part because the trial never had to test the evidence of whether Lindsay physically killed her children in the basement of the family home. The burden is on the prosecution to prove she committed a crime, but she has accepted she killed the children, including in a civil lawsuit she is taking against the healthcare providers she says failed to appropriately diagnose and treat her mental health condition. It reads that Lindsay “proceeded to strangle each of her children”.

Her defence lawyer Kevin Reddington told jurors in his opening statement: “This is a woman that was suffering from psychosis at the time that she went down to that basement.”

The trial is about what her mental state was at the time and can she be held criminally responsible. Was there pre-planning to what she did?

I can completely understand the instinct to be critical of Patrick Clancy. She told him she had considered harming the children, he knew how much she was struggling with her mental health, and yet he felt comfortable leaving her alone because he thought she was having a good day. He divorced and remarried at a speed that some have found to be uncomfortable. He managed to give evidence in court without breaking down into pieces.

One big gap in the public’s understanding of this case and Patrick’s mindset is the 911 call. It was played in court but has not been released to the public. People have only been able to hear journalistic accounts of that call. In the absence of hearing for ourselves the proof that Patrick was utterly devastated to find his children dead, it’s easier to assume he’s a faker or to believe claims from some on social media that he was calm on the call.

The timeline of the day the children were killed has been a particular focus of TikTokers seeking to prove Lindsay is a victim of a stitch-up. However the facts presented in court show that Patrick was not at home when the killings occurred.

The court has heard from the woman working at the restaurant that Lindsay ordered takeout from that night. She put in the call at 5.10pm. The woman says Lindsay sounded fine, coherent, not slurring her words. Patrick said he left the house at 5.15pm to collect the food and medicine - he sent an email from his Surface Pro laptop at 5.24pm that throws that claim off a little, but he is on CCTV at a pharmacy three minutes from the house picking up medication at 5.32pm. So in order for you to believe he killed the children and stabbed then pushed his wife out of a window, you’d need to believe he did that (and changed his presumably bloody clothes) sometime before then but after 5.10pm. But the evidence also shows he called Lindsay while out of the house, she didn’t pick up but then she called him back and they had a brief conversation. He is on CCTV at the restaurant at 5.54pm and then he’s home just after 6pm and calls police at 6.11pm when he finds Lindsay laying on the ground outside the house. The defence has not challenged this evidence. The defence has picked holes in the investigation conducted by police, but not significantly challenged Patrick’s version of events. It’s not just a case of “Patrick said”. The CCTV, restaurant witness and call logs match this account.

I know there are questions online about the timeline, about Lindsay’s smart watch, about Lindsay’s body temperature when she was found, but a lot of these have been explained by witnesses and those that haven’t it’s because the trial isn’t about proving who did this. Some people claim that Patrick is best mates with the case’s lead investigator - this is a reference to a former district attorney who has since bought the family home. Even if the pair are friends, that man has not worked in the DA’s office since 2018.

There is a scenario, a very unlikely one, where the jury finds her not guilty and she walks free. But given she accepts she committed these acts, it is really a debate about whether the jury finds her not guilty by reason of insanity, guilty of manslaughter, or guilty of murder in the first or second degrees. This was down to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

We’ve seen this week that the jury is struggling. On Tuesday they told a judge they cannot reach a unanimous verdict. Yesterday they again said they are deadlocked. Judge William Sullivan has told them to keep on trying to come to a decision. We don’t know what verdicts the jury are split between or by how many. If they remain deadlocked, the judge may declare a mistrial. This could lead to another trial for Lindsay, who is paralysed after her suicide attempt and remains on one-to-one supervision due to her mental state at the psychiatric hospital in Massachusetts where she is being held.

I think this case really highlights what happens when true crime obsession and algorithms meet a very rare, very horrific criminal case. People sympathise with Lindsay’s struggle to get the correct mental health treatment. They don’t want to believe a loving mother could do this. And so they look for gaps, outliers anything to make it make sense. They see that her husband, at times, didn’t step up in the way they feel he should have.

Maybe the main reason the Clancy conspiracy theories have become so passionately defended online is that some people are more comfortable with those than the idea a desperately unwell mother who had been let down went on to do the unspeakable.

• A woman has been charged with jury intimidation after taking photos of jury members outside the courthouse in the Lindsay Clancy trial. Dawn Light, 56, is alleged to have sat in a restricted area outside the building and photographed jurors as they left. She has denied the charges. Light claims she wanted a picture of Lindsay.

In other news…

• In a development that has surprised a lot of people, Rishi Sunak has outlasted Keir Starmer as an MP. After losing the 2024 general election, most people expected Sunak to relocate to California for a high-paid finance job. Instead we’ve seen Starmer, who only in July told the BBC he planned to remain as an MP, throw in the towel and trigger a by-election in his London seat. He told the Camden New Journal this is the “right time” for him to leave. I suspect an international role of some description is calling his name. That and, following a summer out of the public eye with his family, he decided he’d had enough of Westminster. Count Binface has already indicated he plans to stand for election. This could also be an opportunity for Green leader Zack Polanski to fight for a seat, although Labour had a strong win in the Holborn and St Pancras constituency in 2024.

• Fighting in the US-Iran war has restarted, with both sides trading strikes across the region in renewed escalation. Iran struck a US air base yesterday, after an American attack hit a wedding, killing four people, according to Iranian state media. As we’ve become used to in this conflict, Donald Trump has continued to push out tough guy, victory rhetoric, promising to hit Iran “hard” and sharing an AI video of strikes to Kharg Island, where most of Iran’s oil is processed for export. The two sides have been at a stalemate for weeks. While the US has been pushing Iran to allow free and safe passage for ships through the Strait of Hormuz, the Iranian regime does not want to let go of its newly found leverage. Giving up the Strait would mean surrendering a key deterrent that Iran has found is far more effective than its missiles, proxies such as Hamas and its nuclear programme.

• The Home Office is combatting some bad summer PR around small boats by trying to push the real numbers. In posts across the department’s social media platforms, the Home Office said that total small boat crossings are down to their lowest levels since 2019 for June, July and August. The total number for the season is at its lowest since 2020. Despite that, the government is struggling to convince the public of the facts. A YouGov poll from August shows most people incorrectly believe that more people are crossing the Channel in small boats than last year. Social media videos from politicians like Tory shadow home secretary Chris Philp showing French police watching on as people clamber into boats to cross the Channel have gone viral over the summer. The Home Office has tried to strike back at the narrative that the French police are not taking enough action by sharing its own footage of officers slashing a boat it had seized. The government has also had to face the headlines about “mega-dinghies” now being used to transport hundreds of people at once. This highlights the difficulty the government has in meeting people where they are. The algorithm on platforms like X does not favour UK government accounts.

• Speaking of French-British relations, president Emmanuel Macron joined King Charles and Andy Burnham to unveil the Bayeux Tapestry exhibition at the British Museum last night. The loan of the medieval tapestry from France is the result of 10 years of discussions between the two countries. The King hailed it as the “best possible symbol” of the relationship between Britain and France. The exhibition is already sold out this year. The next batch of tickets will be available for January from October 21.

• Enthusiastic Donald Trump supporter and ICE champion Milo Yiannoupoulos has had a change of heart after he was detained and deported from the US last week. Yiannopoulos claims he was treated “like a gang member” when ICE detained him for overstaying his visa. In June last year, he said the US must “deport millions and millions and millions of people”, and argued that immigration agents should have “total legal immunity” after fatally shooting a Mexican man in September. He told Piers Morgan this week: “I didn’t really understand the physical reality of how institutionalised the brutality is in America. The manner in which they arrest you. They put you in manacles, your hands, your feet, chained together.”

• Hunter Biden, son of former US president Joe Biden, has thrown himself head first into the public sphere this year. He’s become outspoken across social media platforms - happy to own his past misdemeanours and clap back at his critics - and appeared on multiple podcasts, including some that have raised eyebrows, such as right-wing commentator and conspiracy theorist Candace Owens. This week he was interviewed by Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan. What I’ve found odd about the clips of particularly this most recent one, but others too, is how much people are trying to hold Hunter accountable for his father’s decisions in office. It’s almost like he’s being treated as part of the Biden administration, even though his only connection is being Joe’s son. He wasn’t part of that government. And yet Hunter was being quizzed hard about Joe’s decisions at the start of the war in Gaza and arming Israel. It’s not that his opinion or knowledge is irrelevant, but it’s weird to lean on him so hard given I’ve never seen another child of a politician be expected to take responsibility or provide accountability for their father’s decisions in such a way.

• Argentinian leader Javier Milei will deliver a national broadcast today on what he calls the “historic claim” to the Falklands. Donald Trump has been reportedly considering recognising Argentina’s claim in response to Britain’s refusal to take part in offensive strikes in the Middle East as part of Operation Epic Fury. This may have emboldened Milei in the long-running dispute over the archipelago. The British government’s stance continues to be that the Falklands are British and will remain that way.

• Google has kowtowed to Donald Trump and renamed Lake Ontario as Lake America, per the president’s petty act intended to give Canada a kicking amid an ongoing trade war between the two countries. An Ipsos poll found 63 per cent of Americans oppose the move, with 57 per cent also opposing the president’s new tariffs on Canada.

• Actress Maureen Lipman has said she “will not be bullied” after a castmate quit their Soho Theatre play over her pro-Israel stance.

The Watchlist

Death of the Pastor’s Wife (Netflix). A three-part documentary series about the death of Mica Miller, 30, who was found dead in a state park having purchased a handgun earlier that day. The documentary examines her relationship with her husband, pastor John-Paul Miller, and the allegations of abuse against him. I finished this thinking JP - who was frequently shown preaching about the duty of a woman in fulfilling her husband’s sexual needs - is one very sick individual.

Furious (Disney+). The season finale of this drama series about a serial killer on a revenge rampage against her wealthy abusers was fantastic. The story - which feels more than a little inspired by the crimes of the late billionaire Jeffrey Epstein - has followed FBI agent Alice on the trail of killer Catherine. The subject matter, young girls being trafficked for rich men, is dark however the show manages to deal with this sensitively while still being able to lighten the mood a little with some humour. Well worth a watch.

Leave a comment

The reality is that far from being a lightbulb moment where I read an incredible scoop and felt an inescapable urge to do something exactly like that, I actually found that I rather liked English at school and journalism looked like a good fit.

However it is fair to say that watching movies centred around the importance and often outlandishness of journalism over the years have inspired and grabbed my attention in a unique way.

Some of those movies had me nodding along enthusiastically. Others had me hurling M&Ms at the screen and shouting “if only”.

So this week I am sharing something a little different with you, a run down of my absolute favourite journalism movies and how they’ve made me reflect on my own career as a reporter.

Spotlight (2015)

I remember being in absolute awe of this film, about the Boston Globe’s exposure of the Catholic church’s efforts to cover up child abuse committed by members of its clergy, when I first watched it at the cinema. It has gone on to become one of very few movies I will happily sit down to watch again and again (maybe that needs to be a whole list of its own).

It is the perfect example of why investigative journalism, and funding good journalism, as well as giving it space and time to happen, really matters.

The subsequent parody of Spotlight done by US Last Week Tonight host John Oliver, titled Stoplight, really has to be watched right after this. It highlights how deep cuts to newsrooms combined with the relentless pursuit of quick clicks over deep dives has meant investigations like this one have become harder for papers to do.

My old employer, Reach, publisher of the Daily Mirror and hundreds of regional titles, exemplifies this parody. The publisher has pursued a high click strategy over quality journalism for years, giving journalists view targets for their online stories and encouraging them to double down on what’s working. Use of AI has grown in Reach newsrooms, with reporters hired to use the tech to churn out more content for the network of websites.

A screen in the Mirror newsroom shows journalists what is performing well on the website in real time, encouraging them to publish more of the same. The result is that any subject not yet explored risks being ignored completely. And taking time to investigate leads thoroughly is almost impossible.

The publisher recently announced it is abandoning this strategy, after a huge drop in referral traffic from Google. Having axed hundreds of good journalists last year - some of whom, it must be said, were more relieved than sad to be leaving - Reach now faces a mountain to climb if it wants to get anywhere close to the quality of reporting it needs to make decent money from online subscriptions.

Spotlight reminded me that journalism is often about determination and time. Time to knock on another door. Time to cultivate relationships with sources. And, crucially, money to employ journalists to do all of that.

All the President’s Men (1976)

One of my favourite movies full-stop. I’ve seen this film at least two dozen times and it never gets old.

It’s based on the real story of how Washington Post journalists Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward exposed the Watergate scandal that brought down US president Richard Nixon.

One of the most familiar scenes was where Woodward and Bernstein have been knocking doors for days and getting absolutely nowhere. Finally, a friendly woman welcomes them in and actually thanks them for their work. They cannot believe it, they have finally gotten somewhere. But then their hopes are dashed. It turns out the woman is just enjoying reading their stories, she has no information for them. You can feel the frustration oozing out of them. They thought this was it, but they’re back to square one.

It just summed up doorstepping (the term journalists use for knocking doors of potential sources for a story) for me. Ninety-five per cent of it is frustrating, thankless and feels like you’re banging your head against a brick wall.

Read more

I was reminded this week of what we’ve lost as physical newspapers have become paper thin versions of what they once were as I stepped outside to watch the solar eclipse.

Like most people, we’ve faced a last-minute scramble for eclipse glasses and not managed to secure any despite frantic searches on Amazon and calls to every Robert Dyas within driving distance. My Facebook feed was filled with pleas for anyone who had a pair going spare. Others were charging upwards of £10 a pair having happened to secure a box.

Back in 1999, when we had the last total solar eclipse of the 20th century, several newspapers, such as the now-closed News of the World, gave the glasses away for free with every copy.

Alas this time around, no newspapers were handing them out. We relied on the colander method, and luckily a neighbour was kind enough to lend us theirs!

Burnham’s believers

Andy Burnham is doing a good job.

At least that’s what the polls tell us, with the proportion of Brits who think the PM is doing a good job doubling since he took over, according to More in Common.

This means that Burnham has won the early, and perhaps easiest, stage of being PM - which shouldn’t be downplayed given Keir Starmer made a pig’s ear of it within weeks of winning a huge majority in 2024. Burnham has managed to make people feel hopeful, but now comes the difficult bit, because eventually he has to spell out whether he can deliver on their specific hopes.

He cannot please everyone, but he will eventually have to make choices that reveal who his government is really for, what it is prepared to spend and how much he will ask people to pay.

So far his priorities as he’s outlined them are overhauling the care system and giving people “breathing space” from the cost of living crisis.

The PM embarked on a “listening tour” of the UK this week where he explained that his will be a “cost of living government”.

He told the BBC: “You can’t solve that with one big move. Big moves can help but what you’ve got to do is put an accumulation of smaller things in that in the end will combine to take the pressure down.”

His early measures have included a £2 bus fare cap, removing VAT from electricity bills and business rate cuts for pubs and clubs.

In making these moves, it seems that Burnham took inspiration from personal finance journalist Martin Lewis.

Giving his take on what government should do to turn bad polls around, Lewis said at a Labour Party conference Politico fringe event in September last year: “Find 100 small things that piss people off that you can fix and they can see that you have fixed them.”

It’s notable though that when Lewis listed off some things the government could change, several were anything but small, such as overhauling student loan repayments. This certainly wouldn’t come cheap.

In keeping with the “fix things that piss people off” strategy, this week Burnham announced the government would make it easier to cancel unwanted subscriptions. This was actually a measure from Keir Starmer’s government, which Burnham has simply brought forward a few months.

His hopes to put money back in people’s pockets may hit a brick wall thanks to Donald Trump’s ongoing campaign/war/excursion in Iran. The treasury has warned Burnham and his chancellor, John Healey, that GDP growth could be just 0.3 per cent in 2027 if the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked. The forecast from the OBR was for 1.6 per cent growth. This could lead to higher inflation and less room for Burnham to make people feel better off.

When we take a step back, Burnham is yet to do anything significant. He brought forward the care system review, but we have no specifics on his vision here yet. While he has given us broad brush lines on his stance on issues such as Israel and Gaza and immigration, he hasn’t had to take any major decisions on these yet.

On immigration, Burnham this week pledged to be “relentless” on small boat crossings after the largest-ever migrant boat to cross the Channel, carrying 230 people, landed in Kent.

He also warned that people living in poor areas should not be expected to house all asylum seekers, telling GB News: “We cannot have a situation where it’s only the poorest communities in the country that receive all of the dispersal of refugees and asylum seekers.”

Burnham will be all too aware, having spent weeks on the doorstep in Makerfield - a constituency that largely voted Reform at the May local elections - of the growing tensions around immigration. Labour’s stance on the issue has been informed by the concern that people’s anger at the so-called Boris-wave, combined with the impression of a lack of control in the Channel, could lead to a loss of public consent for the whole immigration system.

The answers are not easy. This week the Home Office announced it had closed 13 asylum hotels. But there are still people who the government is obliged to house, and they have been sent to HMOs or military bases. Both have also proven unpopular with some communities.

In Thetford, Norfolk, the tensions have boiled over, with protesters targeting addresses they believed housed asylum seekers. The residents of the properties had to be moved to safety by police. Six people have been arrested.

In Piddington, Oxfordshire, residents are to hold a symbolic referendum on whether to become independent from the UK in protest over plans to house asylum seekers at a nearby military base.

It is unclear exactly what Burnham will do to navigate this hot-button issue. Not all in government are singing from the same hymn sheet. While doing the media rounds this week, housing secretary Angela Rayner emphasised all people who arrive on small boats are fleeing persecution. This is in contrast to the tone still being set by the Home Office’s social media posts on deportations and closure of asylum hotels. These are almost Trumpian in the way they promote home secretary Shabana Mahmood’s tougher stance on illegal arrivals and deportation.

People don’t believe Burnham has solved Britain’s problems, but his actions so far have made them believe that he might. For now that is enough. Eventually, it won’t be.

• Greggs have renamed Burnham’s favourite order “The sausage, bean and cheese thing”, as he referred to it in an interview with LBC this week.

Burnham’s inherited justice system crisis is now his to own

What’s happened? Andy Burnham has told his justice secretary, Alex Norris, to explore “every option” to keep the killers of PC Andrew Harper behind bars. Albert Bowers and Jessie Cole are eligible for early release under the government’s scheme to free up prison space.

Why are they up for release? Under the Sentencing Act 2026, the government has authorised plans to release 6,000 prisoners in batches, starting from October. It means most adults serving standard determinate sentences in prison will leave earlier than the date originally set, after serving a third of their sentence. Last week Burnham moved to exclude rapists and child sex offenders from the scheme following public outcry, however those guilty of manslaughter, including Bowers and Cole, remain eligible. Making an exception for them could, it is feared, leave the government open to legal challenge.

Who’s involved? Every chief constable in England and Wales has signed a letter to Burnham calling on him to block the release of Bowers and Cole. They say there is a “profound strength of feeling across policing” that the two men should not be released early. PC Harper’s wife and mother have also called on the government to take action.

Why it matters? Burnham has had a flurry of positive announcements, but when it comes to the big challenges, he is learning there is only so much he can control as PM. He said this week: “I am increasingly confident that a more focused approach will allow us to reduce the number of people released early and, in the case of the most serious offenders like those convicted of the killing of PC Harper, prevent their early release altogether.” But even a win on this case, if he can legally block the two men’s release, still leaves him open to criticism over the thousands who will get out early. There’s also the potential for re-offending. The probation watchdog has warned there’s a major risk of reoffending and probation services are already under “unprecedented pressure”. The prison population has doubled from 44,000 in 1993. The swamped courts system, including people held on remand - accounting for 18 per cent of the total in custody - and those held on recall for breaching conditions of release has added to the pressure.

Anything else? The press have reported this week that before his exit Keir Starmer offered to front the scheme before he left. Basically he said he would own the releases entirely to spare Burnham the bad PR. Burnham is said to have turned this down, wanting to “do it in his own way”. Overcrowded jails are not Burnham’s fault, this has been allowed to happen over many years due to lack of investment in new prison space and a swamped courts system. However the way the pressure on space is handled and the consequences will be his to own. Burnham is exploring other ways to free up jail cells, including examining the 2,270 people in prison in England and Wales under Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences. These sentences were abolished in 2012, but who were issued with them before this remain in prison for crimes such as mobile phone theft.

• The problems faced by the creaking justice system were brought into sharp focus yesterday following the jailing for a whole-life term of murderer and rapist Simon Levy. The 40-year-old was on bail as a suspect for murdering Carmenza Valencia-Trujillo in March 2025 when he murdered Sheryl Wilkins five months later. He also raped another woman in January 2025. Before those attacks, Levy had a committed a series of sexual assaults on women on trains in London. He went on to commit more after the first murder. Met Police commissioner Mark Rowley called the case a “whole system failing”. He said: “He was repeatedly put by police before the courts seeking he be remanded in custody, saying this man is too dangerous to be on the streets, and between the CPS and the courts, they kept bailing him.” Mayor of London Sadiq Khan said Valencia-Trujillo, Wilkins and Levy’s other victims “deserved a system that believed and protected them”.

Meanwhile…

• A former student of ex-Cambridge University professor Jason Arday has claimed he accused her of having “white privilege” when she questioned her grade. Writing for Unherd, the woman said Arday’s teaching was “terrible”, he was often late to class and he would “ramble” about Tinie Tempah lyrics. Arday quit the university last month following a storm over plagiarism allegations and his fantastical back story, including a claim of having run 30 marathons in 35 days, including nine on a fractured leg. Journalists have been pouring over Arday’s book, Great and Unfortunate Things, and its original proposal for publishers. It includes claims that he had been treated for testicular cancer and in a separate health incident was in a coma that doctors had thought he wouldn’t survive and at one stage told his parents to turn off life support. He claimed to have begged a judge to let off two men who had beaten him up, only to encounter them in a classroom as their teacher, with one of the men asking him to be godfather to their child. While many of Arday’s claims lack dates and locations to enable fact checking, it would appear that Arday is a modern-day Walter Mitty who rose to a prominent position because some in the world of academia didn’t want to question the fairytale. In one quote from the book, Arday describes how he was uncertain about taking the role at Cambridge: “What if I have completely overestimated my capabilities? What if my story ends up being a cautionary tale like Icarus about flying too close to the sun?”

  • The most concerning thing for me about the Arday story has been what has emerged about legal threats to a journalist for the Times Higher Education newspaper. The full letter sent last year by legal powerhouse Carter-Ruck warning a reporter off the story has been revealed and includes claims about the plagiarism allegations that some have suggested are false.

• The White House press corps has been left reeling after a Washington Post scoop revealed that Donald Trump switched from Air Force One to another plane via a catering truck when leaving Turkey last month. The security measure happened due to a credible threat from Iran. It meant that White House staff and journalists were left travelling on board the president’s plane unaware they were being used as a decoy. They were asked to keep the blinds on the plane shut, while unknown to them, the president, having waved as he entered Air Force One, then was loaded onto a catering truck and driven over to the other plane. This move is not without precedent, as Bill Clinton also did something similar in 2000, although at least one journalist was briefed at that time. However there’s something about this particular incident that’s hit a nerve and felt particularly cold, especially given Trump was later filmed telling the press corps “if you go, I go” in response to questions about security threats to Air Force One.

• Clacton heads to the polls for the second time in just over two years today (Thursday) for the by-election triggered by Reform leader Nigel Farage as a self-styled referendum on whether he is dodgy. If Farage wins, which he almost certainly will, he still faces a Commons investigation over a £5million gift he received from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne. Farage triggered this by-election because he said the people should decide whether they feel this was acceptable conduct. He says the money was a gift that was unrelated to politics or his decision to run in the 2024 election. Although country-wide polling shows people would prefer Count Binface to win, Clacton polling shows Farage comfortably holding the seat. We may see another by-election in the constituency before the end of the year, depending on the outcome of the investigation.

  • The by-election has been a bright spot amid the chaotic Westminster news agenda, thanks to Count Binface, who has been Farage’s main competitor as the leading political parities refused to field candidates. Binface has been filming himself at Clacton landmarks and appeared on a steady run of actually serious political podcasts over the last six weeks. The high point of his campaign came this week, in this clip from an NPR interview where Binface responds to a request to describe his politics in “American political terms” by switching to an American accent.

• The stars of The Salt Path - Gillian Anderson and Jason Isaacs - are set to go on what’s going to be a challenging promotional tour of the US to mark the film’s Stateside release. The movie is based on the book of the same name, which purported to be the true story of author Raynor Winn’s defiant coastal walk despite the severe health problems suffered by her husband. Questions have since been raised about the book’s accuracy. Anderson has already told the Radio Times that the controversy has been “unfortunate”.

  Subscribe now

The Watchlist

Alley Cats (Netflix). Ricky Gervais’ new animated sitcom featuring cats is deeply unfunny. It’s the kind of show that you can imagine was funny when Gervais was talking about it with a friend while imagining what conversations cats may have with each other if they would talk. Unfortunately it doesn’t translate to a decent TV show when you rely so heavily on the word “cunt” to make something funny simply by being used frequently. I have no issue with swearing, but this was just dull and a rare miss from someone whose work I’ve always really enjoyed.

Groomed: The Truth Behind the Lie (Sky Documentaries and Now TV). This documentary re-examines the case of Ellie Williams, who was jailed for eight years in 2023 for perverting the course of justice after faking claims of abuse at the hands of an Asian grooming gang. Groomed explores how the far-right sought to exploit Williams’ public Facebook post about her claims, and how her family still believe that Williams was telling the truth that she had been a victim. It’s a tough watch, but explores what Britain’s police and social services have gotten wrong about the grooming gangs scandal.

Leave a comment

The scenes from Ceuta, where 60,000 people from Morocco poured into the Spanish enclave by overwhelming the border fences or swimming around them last week, have sparked a panic among European governments. The footage showing predominantly young men filling the North African coastal city’s streets has been seized upon by the populist right as a sign that weak European border policies are compromising security.

In response, Burnham made a show of visiting Dover, where he promised to be “relentless” in tackling small boat crossings.

His decision to retain Shabana Mahmood as home secretary is a sign he plans to continue with much the same approach as Keir Starmer before him, despite concerns on the left of his party that Mahmood’s hard approach is too far to the right.

Her tougher border policies have been praised as being responsible for a 40 per cent reduction in small boat crossing this year, although smugglers have been dangerously packing people onto boats in recent weeks. One caught fire and had to be rescued by French authorities this week.

Reform and the Conservatives have been all over the issue this week, sending Lee Anderson and Chris Philp respectively to film on French beaches as waves of people clamber onto dinghies to head for Britain.

Reform used the concerns caused by the Ceuta footage as a springboard to launch its proposal to stop the boats - simply send them back using the Royal Navy. It is a seemingly straightforward proposition, but one fraught with potentially dangerous outcomes and, as has been pointed out by maritime experts on both sides of the Channel, is unlawful.

Burnham will have already come to the conclusion that Starmer did before him, stopping the boats is impossible, but he needs to be seen to be doing something that produces results.

Having spent his first two weeks making a flurry of announcements supported by his cheeky chappy-style TikTok videos, Burnham has also collided with the reality of the big job when it comes to prisons.

Overcrowded jails were a problem inherited from the Conservative government, which created only 500 new prison places in 14 years, in 2024.

This is becoming Burnham’s problem just as it reaches peak bad PR, with thousands of prisoners convicted of serious crimes to be released early from October.

Burnham has stepped in to make some changes, such as preventing the release of those convicted of rape. But some killers, including two men involved in the killing of PC Andrew Harper, will go free after serving just one-third of their sentence. The move has led the Police Federation and Thames Valley Police to threaten legal action.

The trouble for Burnham’s government is making further exceptions will only lead to more appeals from appalled victims not to release an offender. Behind virtually every offender will be a person or people with a strong case to argue they should not be allowed out early. All of this will hit hard as the first batch are released in October.

The PM wrote a column in the Telegraph to explain why he has had to keep the early release scheme, and no reasonable person can fail to see the reality of the impossible situation he is in. Without freeing those 5,000 individuals early, there will be no prison spaces for new offenders and space cannot be created overnight.

Polls suggest the British public haven’t made their mind up about Burnham just yet. While Burnham’s personal popularity is higher than Keir Starmer’s was at this stage in his premiership, Labour is pretty much neck and neck with Reform in the polls, rather than surging ahead of the party. Even with these two big stories dominating the news this week, I would say it’s far too early to declare Burnham’s honeymoon period as being over.

The Mail coined a new nickname, Bunk Off Burnham, when it emerged the PM is taking two weeks off having spent two weeks in the job. It’s a ridiculous stance, given most prime ministers before Burnham have taken time out in August, as it’s the parliamentary recess period. Sure, Burnham had more than just a hand in the timing of his takeover, but can we really begrudge someone a couple of weeks off in summer, whatever their job?

The headlines this week have offered Burnham an early taste of how unforgiving life in Downing Street can be. They coincide with his appearance on the How to Fail podcast with Elizabeth Day, he’ll be hoping it remains a podcast title and not a prophecy.

Ceuta fact check

• The online chat about what happened in Ceuta has been divisive, as you would expect. While the right have referred to it as an “invasion”, some on the left have been labelling it a non-event, pointing out most of those who crossed in those frenzied scenes have since returned. I’ve seen several posts claim Ceuta is not in Spain. While it is true that Ceuta is not on mainland Spain, it is in North Africa, and it is not part of the Schengen travel area - allowing free travel between EU nations - it is Spanish territory. Irregular migrants cannot travel to the EU from Ceuta without facing border checks, but those applying for asylum could go to mainland Spain, although they are not permitted to leave Spain. If they are granted Spanish asylum, then they do not have the automatic right to live and work elsewhere in Europe. The scenes in Ceuta are being used by politicians across Europe to reinforce existing arguments about migration, even though what happened there is a very different phenomenon from the Channel crossings consuming British politics. The footage should not be presented as evidence that those arriving in Ceuta are the same people who will later be boarding small boats for Britain. At the same time, to dismiss people’s concerns about insecure borders only feeds frustrations and the appeal of the populist right.

The story behind the Jason Arday controversy

The world of academia is in the spotlight this week as doubt continues to be poured over the backstory and academic record of Cambridge’s youngest black professor, Jason Arday. Following days of headlines, Arday announced he has quit his role in a statement last night.

The plagiarism row that has engulfed the University of Cambridge has gripped the online world, with reporters, academics and others picking holes in decades of Arday’s claims.

How this story came to blow up - getting huge attention in the US as well as dominating UK media and social media - is down to two reasons. First of all, the online discussion has become divided between the two tribes - you’ve got your right wingers claiming this is proof that institutions like Cambridge have allowed DEI to go too far and that they’re prepared to overlook whopping lies and fraud in order to meet quotas, then you’ve got the left saying all criticism of Arday is racist and that black academics are more scrutinised than their counterparts. In the middle are journalists and academics insisting there are relevant questions to answer, and asking them is not symptomatic of racism, but ignoring them could be a sign of academic incompetence. The second reason is his story is fantastical - including superhuman running feats and fundraising efforts - and until now remained unscrutinised.

Let me try and bring you up to speed, because it has been a rollercoaster.

Who is Jason Arday? At age 37, Arday became professor of sociology of education at Cambridge in 2023. His story was celebrated as a triumph over adversity, having been diagnosed with autism, been non-verbal until age 11 and only learned to write at age 18. His memoir, Great and Unfortunate Things, is due to be published next week.

What happened? Last month, a Substack article by Nathan Cofnas, who has previously claimed that in a meritocracy, there would be “close to zero” black professors at Harvard, stated he had put Arday’s PhD from Liverpool John Moore University through a plagiarism detector. Cofnas, a Ghent professor who was sacked by Cambridge in 2024, wrote that this found “many passages are lifted with minimal editing, sometimes retaining copy-editing mistakes from the original source”. That article was met with a blanket dismissal from Arday and Cambridge, which said he had been the victim of a “vile campaign to undermine his credibility”. The Telegraph then picked up the story, claiming that 100 passages in the PhD belonging to Cambridge’s “diversity poster boy” are identical or nearly identical to a Brunel student’s thesis from 2009. Other claims include participant quotes in his research that appear to have been taken from another researcher’s own analysis and “impossible” data, such as a breakdown of participants’ genders, which adds up to 110 per cent. In response to the criticism, a petition was launched by the Good Law Project, a left wing campaign group, backing Arday and saying he is the victim of a campaign to discredit black academics.

Since those two articles came out, a series of other claims made by Arday and details in his CV and biographies have come under scrutiny:

• Claimed to have run 30 marathons in 35 days, including nine marathons with a hairline fracture to his leg, as well as 300 miles in three days on the treadmill and 600 miles in 12 days.

• Raised £5.5million for charity. He has since clarified this money was raised as part of a syndicate of people, but would not name any of them as he says he has signed an NDA.

• Lost his memory and had to re-learn his thesis following the removal of a benign brain tumour two-weeks prior to his exam.

• Worked for the charity WaterAid installing water points in South America and west Africa. WaterAid has said it never sent volunteers abroad.

• Took part in the Seven Up documentary series. This was taken to mean the television programme, which began before he was born. It was later clarified he meant an informal network in his local area that was given the name Seven Up.

• Claimed he was a visiting professor at the University of Glasgow. This is not true. Ohio State University has also said it has no record of Arday being a visiting professor, despite this appearing on his Cambridge profile.

• Said he was the author of a book called Being Young, Black and Male: Challenging the Dominant Discourse. There is no evidence that any book was written or published.

What has Arday said? The professor spoke out amid the furore over the weekend, doing interviews with The Guardian and The Times. Neither interview has quelled the storm. Arday told the Guardian that attempts to intimidate him had included a pig’s head being sent to his parents’ home. He claimed local police spoke to a butcher, who had sold a whole pig on that day. The Guardian checked in with police and the Met said it had no record of any such allegation. He also alleged he had been threatened by a masked man with a knife on the Cambridge campus, but no intruder was picked up on CCTV and Arday did not report the intrusions at the time. When asked about their investigation into his claims and whether he could prove them, Arday told the Guardian: “To be honest with you, I thought you’d just believe me.” Arday admitted to making mistakes, but has blamed them on his autism and poor support from his academic supervisors. He said: “There is a well-documented playbook for discrediting Black academics in high-profile positions, and it’s been used to devastating effect in the US and now with me in the UK. My greatest hope is that what is happening to me now will serve to further expose these actors and forces.”

Last night Arday announced he is quitting his role, shortly after Cambridge University said it would investigate his qualifications. Arday said: “This decision should not be interpreted as a loss of faith in scholarship or in the values that first brought me to Cambridge. Nor should it be mistaken for an acceptance of the narratives that have surrounded me. It is simply the decision of someone who has reached the limits of what any person should reasonably be expected to endure.”

Why the pile-on? The vehemence of the coverage and almost gleeful nature of the pile-on against Arday has alarmed some people. The Guardian pointed out in its interview with Arday that the two most vocal critics of Arday, including Cofnas, having harboured controversial views on race appeared to have informed Cambridge’s response. However it has transpired that a journalist for Times Higher Education was investigated by Met Police last year for simply emailing questions to Arday regarding the points that are now being reported widely. Arday also instructed solicitors from the revered law firm Carter-Ruck to defend him from a “apparent attack” by the Times Higher Education. The journalist who tried to run with the story last year, Jack Grove, told The Times: “There were legitimate questions about academic practice that he refused to answer - journalists must be free to ask anyone difficult questions, even star professors.” It has also transpired an academic, Dr David Harris, was reported to police by Arday after raising concerns about Arday’s work. The resulting backlash to apparent attempts to bat away scrutiny has made the entire discourse far more toxic. Professor Colin Mills, head of Oxford’s sociology department, wrote on X: “I do not want the reputation of my discipline, my department, my hardworking and intellectually honest colleagues, or myself smeared by indirect association with academic fraud, low academic standards, and clownish statements from people in positions of authority who should know better.”

What now? Cambridge University has said it takes any allegations of academic misconduct “incredibly seriously”, and added: “Allegations of plagiarism regarding Professor Arday’s thesis and some of his journal publications have been investigated by Liverpool John Moores University and the journals in question.” Cambridge said that Liverpool John Moores reviewed Arday’s thesis and found no plagiarism. However, after academics continued to insist that there is evidence of plagiarism in the work, Cambridge announced its own investigation yesterday. The university said: “The University of Cambridge has begun an investigation following new information about Professor Arday’s academic qualifications and honorary appointments. In order to ensure a fair process, we will not comment further until this has concluded. Separately, there remains a number of ongoing complaints regarding academic misconduct, which are being handled in line with our Misconduct in Research policy.” The university added: “We also fully recognise that there is a person at the centre of this situation, and we continue to provide support to him.” It’s unclear what happens with this probe now that Arday has quit.

“Helpful” online friends of Ariana Grande are anything but

It’s striking how Ariana Grande’s new album sees her hitting out at the pitfalls and evils of fame, at a time when she is also still falling victim to its ills.

In her music video for new track Petal, Grande is seen being gradually destroyed emotionally as she faces audition after audition in the race to become famous. As someone who has been famous since she was a child, the Wicked actress is all-too aware of the toxicity that comes with success like hers. And yet that awareness does not provide protection, as once again she finds herself under the media microscope amid questions about her appearance.

On Sunday, Grande announced she will be “taking a step back from visibility” after her current summer tour, blaming “endless, ongoing public scrutiny”. She has pulled out of a planned role in the West End production of Sunday in the Park with George, due to open next year.

That statement came after her appearance in the Petal music video led to renewed public speculation about her weight and health.

“This poor woman is possibly dying right in front of us,” wrote actress Jameela Jamil on Instagram.

While Jamil’s words were on the extreme end of the scale, others have insisted that voicing concerns at Grande’s appearance publicly is necessary to make the case to girls and women who look up to her as a role model that this is not normal.

While I agree we do not want young girls to believe they must emulate the body image of the artists they admire, at the same time I don’t think comments like Jamil’s are helpful for Grande herself. Whatever she is going through, the best and most constructive help for her will come from the people she knows and loves.

Phrases like “she’s dying before our eyes”, in my view, could make her health worse. It certainly does not carry with it the sense of coming from a place of concern, it oozes aggression.

I also don’t think such confrontational language is helpful for people suffering from eating disorders who may read such a comment.

If we are going to have the conversation publicly, which we clearly are as every media outlet has put out a feature or podcast this week, it needs to be done sensitively and not with a view towards driving engagement for the individual. Fans and onlookers have helped Grande reach an incredible level of stardom, but publicly gossiping about how she looks won’t achieve anything positive, even when insisting it comes from a place of being kind. Millions of online spectators may feel emotionally invested in her life, but concern expressed to an audience is not the same as care offered in private from people who actually know her.

Grande herself previously said: “I think we should be gentler and less comfortable commenting on people’s bodies, no matter what.”

Meanwhile…

• Newspaper publisher Reach - known for its ad heavy news websites - has announced it is “moving away from volume” to focus on high-quality journalism. For years the Mirror publisher has pursued a clickbait strategy, even giving journalists monthly click quotas they must hit on national and regional websites. Now that Reach has realised that the algorithm gods at Facebook and Google cannot be trusted to send reliable traffic, no matter how many listicles or “when to expect thunder snow” headlines they churn out, they’re changing tactics. As someone who used to work for the Mirror, it’s frustrating to see this as staff have been shouting that these tactics are only killing the brand faster for years. Now Reach can no longer ignore the numbers. Page views have declined by 40 per cent year-on-year and Google referrals are down 55 per cent in the first half of the year. Whether the new quality strategy actually works remains to be seen, as all of this comes just months after Reach cut hundreds of jobs. Are there enough editorial staff left to create quality content that will encourage readers to take out subscriptions in great numbers? Reach says it has managed to get 40,000 paying subscribers so far. I fear this move is too little, too late.

• Diane Abbott has been welcomed back into the Labour Party following a suspension over allegations she had made antisemitic statements in a social media post and letter to the Observer newspaper. Not long after that news broke, video footage of Abbott speaking at an event, in which she described Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as “Nato’s campaign against Russia”, went viral. This has led to allegations she is spreading “pro-Putin propaganda”.

• Rules on single-sex spaces for England, Wales and Scotland came into force yesterday. The new 342-page statutory code from the Equality and Human Rights Commission was issued in response to the Supreme Court ruling last year, which found that sex for the purposes of the Equality Act means biological sex. That ruling did not change the law, it set out what the law always meant, and the code provides guidance to organisations on how to apply that law in practice. Some councils, such as Green-led Hackney, have pledged to ignore the code. Legal experts have said the EHRC will be constrained by resources when it comes to enforcing the code, however campaigners, such as the group Sex Matters, the code is important to help organisations apply the law.

• MAGA has a nickname for new foreign secretary Ed Miliband - Ed Miliwatt. This refers to criticism of his pursuit of net zero as energy secretary. If I were him I would be pretty happy with that, the movement has far worse nicknames for other people. But it is more witty than Donald Trump’s moniker for the Democrats: Dumocrats. He often openly brainstorms whether it should have a “b” or not during public speeches.

• Disgraced former newsreader Huw Edwards entered an anonymous poetry contest in Wales. Edwards revealed he had entered the poem into the competition at Wales’ largest cultural festival, Eisteddfod, under the pseudonym Y Gelyn, meaning The Enemy. Edwards, who recently started a Substack, did not win.

• This cute cat sounds exactly like a scouser. Phineas the orange cat from Australia has gone viral after viewers declared his meowing sounds like a Scouse accent.

The Watchlist

Furious (Disney+). A female serial killer is chased by a female FBI agent in this gripping TV crime drama about trauma and revenge. I am three episodes in and totally hooked on this new series.

But the news goes on and with a new PM there’s so sign of the usual “silly season” you might see in the media while MPs are on their summer recess and the royals decamp to Balmoral. To be honest, I’m not sure we’ve had an August “silly season” - where daft stories that never would see the light of day in a normal week are suddenly leading the agenda - for more than six years! Keeps us journalists busy, that’s for sure.

If you like this newsletter, don’t forget to follow me over on Instagram. And if you can, becoming a paid subscriber helps me to keep producing this newsletter, so thank you!

Andy Burnham is enjoying his own Brat summer. No, he hasn’t embraced the messy party-girl style that is synonymous with the Charlie XCX album Brat. Although, critics of his penchant for wearing T-shirts to meetings, like he did welcoming Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Portsmouth this week, might say he has.

I mean that he’s riding a high, he’s cool, he’s winning in the polls, he’s created a buzz. Just like Kamala Harris did back in 2024, when her presidential candidacy was announced and singer Charlie XCX declared in a social media post: “Kamala is brat.”

I’m not saying Burnham is headed for an ending like Harris, we all know what happened there (by the way, did you hear she’s weighing up running again in 2028, though many are pouring cold water on this ever becoming reality).

But eventually Burnham’s grand plans for the country will have to be revealed in full, the tough questions will have to be answered and at that point his premiership will make contact with reality.

He’s undoubtedly off to a strong start. His flurry of announcements to help with the cost of living - £2 cap on bus fares, £45 a year off the average electricity bill, a 20 per cent business rate cut for pubs and clubs.

He’s also given us an indication of his big picture plans for the country, including transforming social care.

This is an issue close to his heart, as his father Roy is in a care home with Alzheimer’s. In a speech yesterday, Burnham brought forward a review of the system by Baroness Louise Casey by one year, pledged to look at “fair pay” for carers and vowed to push for a national care service that sits alongside the NHS.

Launching a “national conversation” on how to change care, and how to pay for it, Burnham swerved questions on where he thinks funding should come from, but warned of “difficult decisions”. Those are unlikely to come until 2027, but as he’s sticking with the current Labour manifesto from the 2024 election and promises not to increase the big three taxes, it’s possible he may have to call a general election next year to pay for his plans.

On carers, Burnham said of his experience: “To me, they should be the best-paid people in society, not the worst.”

This is an issue that will resonate with many, and few will argue against it being important. For that reason, he’s hoping this area will be strong for the cross-party working he pledged upon taking office. However, if tax rises are needed to make the changes, it’s likely the Conservatives will oppose.

Burnham’s other strength is he gets social media. By that I don’t just mean he has a great social media manager, which he clearly does. He also gets how to do it well on camera, something that Keir Starmer never grasped.

Starmer tried to harness the power of people who can do it well, inviting hundreds of content creators to Number 10 for influencer briefings. These often failed to perform as well on the creators’ own profiles as their usual content did, largely because the briefings were painfully scripted and dull. The most exciting thing about them for the audience was seeing their favourite influencer go into Number 10. Kudos for the influencer, but zero capital for the PM at the time.

Burnham’s appearance on the Career Ladder - where Max Klymenko tries to guess his guest’s job - shows he’s far more comfortable in that arena. Plus he’s on social media personally, something Starmer never waded into. It’s even in the little interactions. A TikTok video of bride-to-be Sarah Burwin asking Burnham to reduce the police presence around Number 10 North in Manchester as she is due to hold her wedding nearby went viral. Burnham replied with a “Noted Saz” in the comments, gathering more than 40,000 likes.

Burnham has churned out at least two videos a day, where he’s either chatting direct to camera about his plans - throwing a graduation cap in the air that fast cuts to a hard hat to announce his plans to introduce more technical courses for kids aged 14 in schools - or alongside a well-known face. He chatted to the camera with Zelenskyy to affirm the UK’s commitment to Ukrainian defence, and enlisted TikTok’s Bus Aunty for his bus fares announcement.

It’s led to comparisons with New York’s Zohran Mamdani, the socialist Democrat who stormed the city’s mayoral race last year. He too knows exactly how to inspire hope in his voters, frequently appearing on camera not just engaging with people, but also very clearly loving the job. This is something Starmer always lacked, he never looked comfortable, more rabbit in headlights. That is, until the last two weeks of his leadership, ironically, when he relaxed enough to make quips about his hair gel.

Voters are listening to Labour again thanks to Burnham, and as a result of that the party is thrilled, feeling validated that its act of leadercide was entirely justified.

Burnham knows he needs to keep riding this wave into autumn, when he will have to start disappointing people. How will he pay for the things he wants to do - tax the rich, cut welfare spending, increase borrowing? None of these are easy decisions.

What is he to do about home secretary Shabana Mahmood’s immigration reforms? Many Labour backbenchers want him to water them down so that people already in the country don’t face a longer wait to apply for leave to remain. Mahmood has overseen a huge reduction in small boat crossings - 40 per cent down this year compared to the same period last year. However in the last week, the largest-ever dinghy, packed with a record 165 people, crossed the Channel from France.

Bloomberg reports that Labour MPs have warned Burnham against making cuts to welfare.

And what of thorny foreign policy issues? He’s not yet had to provide clear answers on whether he’ll take a different approach to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. Some in his party want more sanctions and for Britain to scale back further its relations with Israel. These are already at a low after Starmer recognised a Palestinian state.

There’s also Donald Trump’s war in Iran that shows no sign of ending soon. Burnham is continuing to allow the US to use UK air bases for defensive strikes, a move that made Starmer popular as he opted out of taking part in offensive strikes. But some in Burnham’s party may have hoped that the new PM would take the country out of involvement in the operation altogether, even though Britain’s strategic positions, allies and citizens are at risk in the conflict.

Burnham has made a flurry of popular announcements that are also relatively inexpensive and easy to communicate. But autumn will be different, because that’s when budgets must add up and trade-offs come into play.

At that point, being comfortable with holding a selfie stick won’t necessarily be the thing that saves him. He’ll need to convince voters, and his own MPs, that difficult decisions are needed to deliver his promises of hope.

• One argument rarely out of the public discussion right now is calls for a wealth tax. Critics of that proposal are pointing to data from Scotland, highlighted by tax expert Dan Neidle, showing that after it increased its top income tax from 45 per cent to 48 per cent, for those earning above £125,140, led the Scottish government to collect less tax. Tax Policy Associates said the change may be costing Scotland around £22million in lost tax revenue a year. Other figures out this week showed the number of UK millionaires has fallen seven per cent since 2024. Sounds like a small proportion, but the top one per cent of earners pay nearly 30 per cent of all income tax. Critics of a wealth tax are pointing to this as a sign that any increase in taxes will lead millionaires to abandon Britain.

Subscribe now

Meanwhile….

• Journalists are self-censoring stories about Donald Trump, the right and trans issues over safety fears, according to an investigation into the safety of journalists.

• I was fascinated by this YouGov poll asking people whether they would take a guaranteed £50,000 or a 50-50 chance to win £1million. Most Brits wanted the £50k, which led American commentator Nate Silver to declare that “this is what’s wrong with Brits”. YouGov fired back with an American poll, which found much the same result. I guess in a cost of living crisis, and amid uncertainty in the US about just how much the Iran war will cost voters, taking a guaranteed £50k is more appealing.

• Netflix is neck and neck with the BBC as the go-to place for Brits when they switch on the TV, according to the annual Media Nations report from Ofcom.

• Zack Polanski refused to apologise for an Instagram post he shared showing a man wearing a T-shirt featuring a guillotine and the phrase “We’re only making plans for Nigel”. Reform UK’s reaction has been furious, demanding that Polanski be arrested and pointing out that this comes just weeks after the murder of Ann Widdecombe in her home. Appearing on BBC’s Newsnight on Tuesday, Polanski said the T-shirt was “clearly in poor taste”, but insisted that posting the picture - which was one of 20 images - was a mistake. He said he would not be apologising as it was not done deliberately. Police confirmed they would not take any action over the image. This has led Reform UK to claim it as an example of “two-tier policing”.

• Elon Musk has branded the editor of The Economist a “traitor” after she quizzed him in a wide-ranging interview on his involvement in politics, British affairs and cuts to US foreign aid. Musk posted that Zanny Minton-Beddoes is a “traitor to the West, plain and simple” and a “woke NPC” (non-player character). During the interview, Musk became particularly defensive when Minton-Beddoes pointed out that “some people do loathe you”. He argued that a “quarter billion people follow me”.

• Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy has an unexpected new friend in the form of US far-right influencer Laura Loomer. She’s famous for spreading conspiracy theories online and was a long-time critic of Ukraine. However, on a visit to Kyiv last week she revealed she’s U-turned on her beliefs, and called on Republicans to be wary of Moscow’s propaganda. “The Russians are very good at capitalising on people’s rage. And I was very angry,” she said. Loomer has the ear of Donald Trump and so having her talking up Ukraine’s position will be no bad thing for the country, which welcomed her with open arms and granted an interview with Zelenskyy.

  • Zelenskyy has been in the US for US Senator Lindsey Graham’s funeral. The politician died shortly after a visit to Ukraine this month. He told Fox News: “We want to stop this war. President Trump wants, the Europeans want. Putin doesn’t want. We are asking to stop this war each day.”

• Donald Trump’s ongoing beef with CNN reporter Kaitlin Collins was back in the news over the weekend when he labelled her “fake” after she won an award at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. He also compared her to transgender model Dylan Mulvaney and claimed she does not smile, saying “smile Kaitlan. Just smile”. Trump often attacks Collins when she asks him questions during press briefings. Collins told The Daily Show: “I’ve always felt this, regardless of who’s the president, whether it’s Joe Biden, Donald Trump. It’s really not about me, and I don’t want it to be about my reaction. And so I think if you let it become about that, then it becomes a back and forth between the two of us.”

• My social media feed has been awash with duelling narratives on the wildfires sweeping Spain and France this month. One side claims that the number and scale of the fires are no different to normal years, and suggests most have been started by arsonists. The other side, which includes Prince William, warns this is what climate scientists have said would happen as the planet heats up. As to the former claim, The EU’s Forest Fire Information System reports that the bloc has recoded 1,200 fires in 2026, which is more than double the annual average. As to how the fires have been caused, we don’t know that at this stage. However the current heatwave is making them harder to contain.

The Watchlist

The Odyssey (in cinemas). I love when big blockbuster cinema releases come with a ton of internet chat and memes. Thankfully, The Odyssey delivers on being a great movie to watch, as well as having entertaining social media discourse. It’s not my favourite Christopher Nolan movie, but it definitely was worth seeing on the big screen. The movie’s had a bit of a kicking from Odyssey translator Emily Wilson. She wrote in the London Review of Books: “I would be ashamed to have written any part of this.” Oof.

Jared Leto: Hollywood’s Dark Secret (BBC iplayer). Four alleged victims of the Hollywood star and singer Jared Leto speak in this documentary of their experiences being targeted and assaulted by Leto. A clear pattern emerges in this documentary of young fans, some just 14 to 16 years old, being singled out by Leto, who was in his 30s and 40s according to the allegations. It’s a troubling tale of what Hollywood is still prepared to tolerate when someone’s star appeal is still sky high enough - or profitable enough - that nothing can touch it.

As always a huge thank you to paid subscribers who absolutely make everything I do possible, you’re the best.

The country is hopped up on hopium. And why not? What with the conflicts in the Middle East, the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, the cost of living crisis and political instability, everyone could use a bit of a boost.

Andy Burnham knows that, and he can see where his predecessor went wrong in terms of tone. The defining feature of his first few days hasn’t been policy detail, but mood.

Subscribe now

Burnham, has pledged to help people with the cost of living and “show how we’re going to pay for” those policies.

He promised he is prepared to “make difficult decisions” when it comes to sticking with the fiscal rules, while at the same time “bring back hope”.

We’ve seen three big spending commitments so far, but nothing concrete on how they’ll be funded. He first announced a £340 million investment to end rough sleeping, followed by an £850 million plan to cut energy bills. Today he is due to announce the restoration of the £2 cap on bus fares, also set to cost millions.

These moves are Burnham setting the mood for his premiership.

Burnham said yesterday he wants to give people “that little extra sense that help is coming”. This is all about the vibes, and perhaps starting off this way, showing he’s not just going to rule out helping households because it’s too expensive/hard/not in government’s remit, might just work enough in his favour.

Contrast what Burnham has done with what happened in Keir Starmer’s early days. Back in 2024, weeks after winning a huge majority, he warned of a “painful” autumn budget and whipped away pensioners’ winter fuel allowance. Burnham will be acutely aware this is where Starmer’s favourability took a nosedive and so positivity is the name of the game.

But making popular promises is easy, while making the tough decisions needed in government and selling those is hard. Plus, while the new cabinet’s mantra this week has been “politics isn’t working for us”, the top team is filled with familiar faces, leading to some accusations that Burnham simply rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The problem is that governing eventually catches up with the messaging.

Apa are some of the challenges already stacking up for Burnham:

• Former head of the British Army, General Lord Richard Dannatt, criticised the decision to replace war hero Dan Jarvis with Wes Streeting - someone with no defence experience - as defence secretary. Former health secretary Streeting was all set to run in a leadership contest but backed off, probably because he saw that he had no chance of beating Burnham’s momentum. Giving him a key role in his cabinet is a good way for Burnham to keep his rival close, and while Streeting lacks experience in defence, he was a solid communicator on health.

• Criticism for bringing Louise Haigh back into cabinet. Haigh, who led Burnham’s Makerfield by-election campaign, quit her job as transport secretary in 2024 after details emerged of a 2014 conviction for fraud by false misrepresentation. The charge related to a work phone she reported as stolen but later began to use again. Her then-employer Aviva called police. Haigh isn’t just back in cabinet, she has a crucial role as first secretary of state, responsible for driving forward Burnham’s agenda.

• How he will fund the £800million VAT cut to energy bills. Chancellor John Healey says this money is coming from the £1.8billion that had been earmarked for the rollout of digital ID cards. Starmer loyalist Darren Jones, former chief secretary to the PM until this week, poured cold water on the plan, saying the ID cards scheme was unfunded. While Burnham has pledged to end party factions and in-fighting, Jones’ intervention shows his fellow Labour MPs may not on board, especially those loyal to Starmer.

• Speaking of the new chancellor, at the top of his priorities will be ensuring funding for defence. His frustration at Rachel Reeves’ failure to meet defence spending targets and additional funds led him to quit as defence secretary only weeks ago. Now he’s back and he has control of the purse strings, you can bet he’s going to find that £5billion, and the rest needed to hit the target of spending three per cent of GDP on defence by 2030. Where’s the money going to come from? Tax rises or borrowing.

• While Healey’s focus has been defence, he now must consider the wider budget and all of the pressures on him to deliver. One of the questions he’ll be facing is how to help students, with money expert Martin Lewis among those urging him to reverse the freeze on Plan 2 student loan repayment thresholds.

• Burnham announced his first pledge was to end rough sleeping. A noble promise, but one he also made as Manchester mayor and failed to meet. In fact, rough sleeping has ticked up in the city over the last four years. In fairness to Burnham, it will be an area he’s studied and perhaps he knows of national levers he can pull to make change happen. Manchester Mill has reported on the failures of Burnham’s rough sleeping pledge in Manchester.

• The former head of the IFS warned that Burnham either cannot deliver on promises, like making changes to the personal tax allowance, or taxes will rise.

All of this means that Burnham’s honeymoon period may be brief. If he maintains the positive tone he has set so far then perhaps he can make it further than Starmer did before reality causes his approval ratings to dip. But come autumn, when a new budget must be set and the explanation for how Burnham will pay for everything has to be given, this is when hopium alone may not be enough.

Starmer’s next move? It’s Fast & Furious

Being usurped seems to suit former PM Keir Starmer, who spent Monday afternoon clutching a pint at the Pineapple pub in Kentish Town alongside a smiling Rachel Reeves.

He was telling the truth when he said he leaves with a smile. Some have rushed to point out that Starmer’s energy is way more impressive post-resignation, with one commenting “leaves office - immediately develops a personality”.

Just look at this TikTok he posted, borrowing a farewell scene from the Fast & Furious movie franchise. Just like Rishi Sunak before him, who’s settled into post-leadership life nicely with a role campaigning for better education in maths and a weekly “I told you so” column in The Times, it looks like being out of Downing Street will suit Starmer very nicely.

@keirstarmerIt’s been a privilege to serve

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Andrew Tate’s MAGA allies may not come to his aid over sex abuse charges

What happened? Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan have been arrested in Miami and are now fighting extradition to the UK, where prosecutors have brought a raft of new criminal charges.

The Crown Prosecution Service has authorised additional charges against Andrew Tate, including seven counts of rape, three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and offences relating to indecent images of children and extreme pornography.

Tristan Tate faces a further six charges, including rape, sexual assault and facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation. Between them, the brothers now face 59 criminal charges in the UK.

The allegations relate to four women and span incidents between 2010 and 2017. The brothers deny wrongdoing.

Why does it matter? Andrew Tate has cultivated close ties with Donald Trump’s political movement and is a vocal supporter of the president. That prompted speculation that allies in Washington could attempt to frustrate the UK’s extradition request.

However, according to The Telegraph, White House officials have indicated they will not intervene, despite Secretary of State Marco Rubio having the power to become involved.

If that position holds, it removes what many saw as the biggest political obstacle to the UK’s attempt to bring the brothers back to face trial.

What happens next? The Tates remain in custody in Florida ahead of their next court hearing on 27 July, where they are expected to continue opposing extradition.

If US courts ultimately approve the request, the brothers would be returned to the UK to face trial. However, the process could take months and may be further complicated by the separate criminal proceedings they continue to face in Romania.

Pro-suicide forum fails to pay £950,000 Ofcom fine

Ofcom has announced that it is unable to take further legal against a pro-suicide forum linked to more than 130 deaths in the UK.

The website was warned it must block all UK users and then issued with a £950,000 fine under the Online Safety Act by Ofcom for failing to do so in May.

However it has now emerged the forum has not paid the fine and Ofcom has run out of legal avenues to pursue the forum.

Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, which campaigns for greater online safety for children, said the decision to take no further legal action would “result in more lost lives”.

Ofcom explained in its announcement that the “Online Safety Act only extends to the design, operation and use of a service in the UK or as it affects UK users – we cannot regulate worldwide use of platforms”.

This case highlights the difficulties and limitations of the Online Safety Act.

It also raises questions about how effective financial penalties are as a deterrent. The Online Safety Act was designed to encourage platforms to comply through the threat of significant sanctions. However if an overseas operator can simply ignore fines and has no UK assets or legal presence, campaigners are likely to argue that the law is less effective against precisely the types of sites that pose the greatest risks.

Going viral

Has anyone else been enjoying videos of this raccoon called Jimothy, who roams back gardens in Seattle?

@cnnA raccoon that Seattle residents have named “Jimothy” is going viral for its unusually round appearance. #cnn #news

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

He came to public attention after one woman filmed him in disbelief at his strange appearance, asking “what am I looking at”. Jimothy has a genetic spinal condition that has led to his unusual short, rounded body. Now videos of him climbing on fences and porches have been everywhere on social media. He’s the positive, uniting story we all needed after the World Cup (I mean, it’s been a controversial one in many ways, but it’s still been fun to watch) and Wimbledon came to a close.

Let me catch you up on the big stories of the week and what it all means. Thank you to paid subscribers who make my work possible!

At final PMQs, Keir Starmer’s never had so much fun

Outgoing prime minister Keir Starmer looks like he’s been having the time of his life in the last few weeks. It’s a shame it took his resignation for him to finally enjoy the job.

Over on social media, he’s been cracking jokes about what hair gel he uses and making World Cup videos with Larry the Cat.

Then there was his 64th and final PMQs in the Commons yesterday, in which he traded jokes with Tory leader Kemi Badenoch and other politicians. Long-standing political disagreements were put to one side in an exchange filled with humour, respect and good-natured ribbing.

At one stage, Badenoch appeared to be making a point about Andy Burnham, suggesting he was intending “to spend the summer avoiding scrutiny, refusing to set out his plans”.

But she then swerved to the by-election in Clacton, asking: “So does he not agree that what the country deserves is a televised debate between Nigel Farage and Count Binface?”

Starmer was happy to join in with the joke, retorting: “My advice is put your vote in the bin.”

When you consider how toxic politics can be in Britain (more on that shortly), and certainly has become in the US, it was heartening to see Starmer and Badenoch exchanging words of genuine kindness and admiration. In one emotional exchange, Badenoch thanked Starmer’s family for supporting the prime minister in doing the job.

She also revealed that the thing she most admired about Starmer happened last year, after Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was booted out of the White House: “When President Zelenskyy was attacked in the White House, the prime minister showed leadership and invited him to Downing Street. That was the right thing to do.”

Read more

This week both the Reform leader and the Duke of Sussex have made claims of an establishment stitch-up out to get them.

Farage claims even the right-wing press are in cahoots with shadowy figures who want to stop him from “saving Britain” by asking questions about whether his property portfolio and finances have been appropriately declared. Yesterday, Reform’s Nadhim Zahawi claimed that Farage was the victim of a “deep state conspiracy”.

Meanwhile, Harry has turned his fire on the judge who dismissed his unlawful information gathering case against the Daily Mail publisher, Associated Newspapers Ltd.

In a searing statement where he labelled the decision a “whitewash”, Harry took aim at Mr Justice Nicklin, pointing out the judge had previously worked on phone hacking cases for the Mirror and Sun publishers when working as a QC.

He added that “the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted”.

Two very different men, unlikely ever to share a pint down the pub, have arrived at similar conclusions: when the system doesn’t deliver the outcome they wanted, the problem isn’t their case but the system itself.

There are of course shades of grey when it comes to both men’s complaints. Many would agree Harry has suffered egregious breaches of his privacy over the years. Some would agree with Farage that being rich and having rich friends who like to gift you money doesn’t exclude you from being in politics.

But both are waging a war on the system itself, pointing their fingers at a rotten core they perceive within that’s out to get them personally.

Let’s take a closer look at these stories, plus the latest from the Nato summit.

Harry’s war on the British press runs out of road

The Mail had no fewer than nine articles at the top of its homepage yesterday celebrating Prince Harry’s High Court defeat in his £50million case against the publisher. In print, the Mail brought out a special historic edition to chronicle the loss, claiming Harry’s case, which included six other claimants, was part of a “conspiracy to destroy the Mail”.

Zooming out, former Mail editor Paul Dacre said that the case had been funded by “orgy-loving racist” Max Mosley and actor Hugh Grant, as part of the Hacked Off campaign bid to “resuscitate Leveson Two”. This refers to the abandoned second part of the Leveson Inquiry, which was supposed to look into the relationship between journalists and the police.

This lawsuit represented Harry’s final swing at the British press in an expensive campaign launched back in 2019 with phone hacking claims against The Sun and Mirror publishers, followed by this case against Associated Newspapers Ltd lodged in 2022. He was victorious in the Mirror case and won a settlement with The Sun.

You may argue that two out of three ain’t bad, but for Harry this loss will sting. Unlike the Mirror and Sun newspapers, the Mail has never accepted that any unlawful information gathering - a term that describes tactics such as blagging, phone hacking, phone tapping and illegally accessing private data - took place at its publication.

Royal commentator Victoria Murphy, who has been covering the royal family for more than 15 years, said: “What is the biggest blow to him I think is the symbolism of the fact that he has lost such a landmark case in the battle with the media that he has described as his life’s work. The fact that this case was against the Mail - the paper he accused of making Meghan’s life a misery - and that it was perhaps the most high profile and most intensely fought and also the last of his ongoing court cases against newspapers makes it a really bitter pill to swallow.”

Harry’s case relied upon evidence such as emails and payments to certain agencies around the time the articles he complained of had been published, as well as the overriding argument that the information could only have been obtained illegally.

But Mr Justice Nicklin ruled that Harry and his fellow claimants, including singer Elton John and actress Liz Hurley, failed to connect the dots, that there was no evidence the information contained within the stories had been obtained by unlawful means.

The articles were often about deeply personal matters, such as Harry’s relationship with then-girlfriend Chelsy Davy. Journalists, including long-time royal reporters Rebecca English and Katie Nicholl, gave evidence saying their sources were close friends of the prince or Davy, or had come from tip-offs to the newsroom, or even a simple call to the royal press office.

In his statement reacting to the judgement, Harry tried to argue that “generic findings about various private investigators” had been used to prove unlawful activity in other cases. Basically that if one private investigator was involved in phone hacking, everyone else must be, and the stories that he believes look like they’ve come via dodgy means must have originated that way. He has insisted throughout that his social circle was not leaky, even though the court case established he was chummy with Mail journalist Charlotte Griffiths, who he referred to as “sugar” in Facebook messages exchanged about their “fun weekend of naughtiness” with friends.

The judge rejected Harry’s argument that one hacking journalist or PI means they’re all at it, writing: “Even where propensity is established against an individual it cannot of itself prove wrongdoing on another occasion.”

The judgment marks a turning point. For more than six years, Harry’s response to his grievances with the British press has largely played out through litigation. With his cases now concluded, there are fewer legal avenues left to pursue - although he could of course decide to appeal this judgement, incurring even greater expenses. Harry is certainly not a pauper, but he does now have to fund an expensive life for himself and his family without help from the royal purse. He may claim money is no object in his moral crusade against the media, but he does not have limitless piles of cash.

Harry must now look to the future and how he manages his relationship with the media, something that is unavoidable given his family’s continued charitable and commercial work in the public eye.

Murphy said Harry is “determined not to let the outcome of the case set the narrative for him even if he may now accept he has run out of road legally”.

She added: “When it comes to practically how he is managing his media relations today, it is interesting that he is taking quite a communicative approach in comparison to previous years since he and Meghan stepped back. He has a UK-based spokesperson who deals with media and is quite communicative. I think that shows that he understands the importance of having a line of communication there. The difference is that now he can control that as he chooses, unlike when he was in the royal system and he had to have his work covered by the royal rota and communicate with all the outlets the royal household deals with.”

Will Harry’s visit rebuild relations with King Charles

On Friday, Harry will be back in the papers as he steps out for an Invictus Games event in Birmingham. Even setting aside the court judgement, this has been a trip filled with drama for Harry.

Over the weekend, it emerged an offer to stay at Buckingham Palace had been withdrawn after Harry initially decided not to accept, then changed his mind and accepted, but after a deadline to let the household know had passed. There were then duelling briefings from both camps, as the palace insisted that logistically Harry’s stay could no longer be accommodated, while Harry’s team said this was “disappointing”. There were also concerns in the royal household about the optics of Harry staying in the palace in the week the High Court judgement was published - this date would not have been in the calendar when the household made the initial offer to host Harry.

It’s important to note that King Charles himself won’t have been across these arrangements, he doesn’t organise the comings and goings of people or staffing at Buckingham Palace, that’s down to the household. But from an outsider’s perspective, the appearance of his not being allowed a room does fuel Harry’s argument that The Firm is out to get him in some way. That’s his perception of it anyway, or at least the one he would like others to believe.

The big question now is whether Harry and the King will meet while the prince is in Britain. King Charles has not seen his grandchildren, Archie and Lilibet, or his daughter-in-law, Meghan, in person since 2022. As of last night it remained unclear whether the children would travel to Britain at all, as Harry is concerned it is not safe for them in the absence of police security. If they do come, it’s highly unlikely Brits will see them in public, as Meghan only offers glimpses of the backs of their heads in her lifestyle brand imagery on social media.

So this wouldn’t be a public reconciliation, and it certainly wouldn’t erase years of mistrust. But if it were to happen, it would round off a week of legal and personal setbacks with the first hint of something different. Harry’s battle with the British press has likely reached its conclusion in the courts. Perhaps his next chapter is less about fighting old battles and more about finding a new normal with the family he left behind.

Rebuilding trust with the King was never likely to happen through dramatic gestures, but through small, private moments that slowly rebuild the bridges between father and son. A pathway for Harry rebuilding his relationship with his brother William is far less clear.

Parties boycott Nigel Farage’s “fake” by-election

As I write this it looks likely that Nigel Farage’s Clacton by-election battle, that he wants to be a “the people vs the establishment” fight, is set to be him vs Count Binface.

Multiple parties - Greens, Lib Dems, Labour, Tories and Restore - announced on Tuesday that none will field a candidate after Farage announced he would resign as MP so he could stand again. The highest profile figure prepared to put their hat in the ring is novelty candidate Count Binface, whose hilarious Makerfield election night interview with Sky News went viral last month. Actor Lawrence Fox and other hopefuls from smaller parties are also set to stand, but Binface is grabbing the headlines.

This has come to a head after weeks of newspaper articles and questions about Farage’s finances, including a £5million gift he received from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne just before the 2024 election and gifts from convicted fraudster George Cottrell.

While Farage had been facing a parliamentary standards investigation over whether failing to declare that £5million broke rules for MPs on donations and gifts, he also came under pressure from the press over his £4million property portfolio. By this week he had had enough, and so, in a move straight out of Donald Trump’s playbook, he’s trying to sidestep the official scrutiny process and ask the people to vote in another by-election, on the basis this will send a message as to whether voters care about Farage’s financial dealings or not.

Farage’s loyal Reform members have been on the attack on his behalf. In a series of media interviews, Robert Jenrick condemned journalists for doorstepping Farage’s daughter at a property he owns. Sky’s Robert Boulton tried to explain that a journalist knocking on someone’s door for a public interest story does not constitute “hounding”. On Newsnight, Laila Cunningham claimed the media was part of the “establishment” hellbent on preventing Farage from winning the next election.

Cunningham also argued to LBC that Farage didn’t need to declare the money he received, despite being chairman of Reform when receiving the money, because he was not politically active, but was working as a “social media influencer and GB News presenter”.

If Farage does win this by-election, he will still face that standards investigation, which could lead to sanctions that trigger yet another by-election.

For loyal Reform voters, they will believe Farage’s MAGA-style claim that this is simply a plot to bring down a hard-working anti-establishment politician. But this could hit Reform hard in their efforts to push beyond their current polling. They’re in the lead, but haven’t been able to push beyond a ceiling of around 26 per cent since the general election.

All of this means that Farage’s hopes for a contest that would allow him to emerge claiming a personal mandate from the people are in danger of falling flat. A referendum on your own reputation only works if someone is prepared to campaign against you. If every major party declines to take part, the spectacle starts to look less like democracy in action and more like a politician staging his own victory parade.

Defeating Count Binface won’t provide the vindication Farage is hoping for. And it may weaken his position ahead of a future by-election, if that standards investigation finds against him.

Trump still cannot exit Iran conflict

A sigh of relief from Nato leaders in Turkey this week, as Donald Trump was quoted as having told them “we want to remain with you”. Maybe his threats of withdrawing the US from the treaty won’t happen after all. Then again, we all know he could do a U-turn before the weekend.

At a summit in Ankara, Trump also confirmed what many military and geopolitical experts have been warning for months, that his war in Iran has become a quagmire from which he is aimlessly struggling to detach himself from.

Answering questions about the Iran ceasefire alongside Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, Trump said: “I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them any more. They’re scum. You know what scum is? They’re scum.

“They’re sick people. They’re led by sick people and they’re vicious, violent people. And if they had a nuclear weapon, they’d use it. As far as I’m concerned, it’s over.”

His comments came the morning after US forces launched 80 strikes on Iran over Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz. He did, however, add that negotiators do want to keep talking.

That means the Iran-US conflict is in much the same position that it’s been for weeks. Trump wants Iran to give up its nuclear weapons and agree to a toll-free opening of the Strait. Iran is not inclined to give up all of its leverage having been bombarded with US strikes earlier this year.

The president assumed when starting Operation Epic Fury on February 28 he could get everything he wanted within six to eight weeks. That has not come to pass and this stalemate shows no signs of resolving.

“We hit them (Iran) hard last night,” the president said at the Nato summit. “We will probably hit them hard again tonight.”

More strikes were launched against Iran, with US Central Command saying they were in response to “recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews” in the Strait of Hormuz

While Nato allies were full of praise for Trump at the summit, privately they are very aware that this conflict dragging on impacts their own interests at home.

Keir Starmer, attending his last of these summits as prime minister, called for a return to the ceasefire after a “challenging” few days. The Iran conflict will be among the key issues in Andy Burnham’s in-tray once he inevitably becomes PM in less than two weeks. He has few, if any, options for managing Trump, whose errors in Iran are now catching up with him.

The Watchlist

Cape Fear (Apple TV+). I fear this TV show based on the previous movie adaptations may have been stretched out a little too thin, but I’ve not reached the end yet so I will reserve judgement on the overall story arc for now. What I will say is the performances from the main cast - Amy Adams, Patrick Wilson and Javier Bardem - are exceptional. There’s also some incredible use of the camera, with off-kilter angles, quirky pans and quick cuts, that take you back to the tension built in the 1991 film starring Robert de Niro. The storyline of this is very different to that movie - Max Cady is an accused murderer not a rapist. He also has a troublesome, and rather annoying, daughter in the mix. Some episodes and scenes have felt far too much like filler to take it from a movie to TV series, but on the whole this has kept me engaged and I’m curious how they will round it off.

Coming back to the news cycle really brought it home to me how jarring the current upheaval in our government is for anyone not in t…

Read more

A quick note: over the coming weeks you’ll see some changes to The News List. Rather than trying to cover as many stories as possible, I’m going to focus on stories that mattered most this week and breaking down what they mean and what’s next. I am always pleased to receive feedback about the newsletter so do get in touch if you have any thoughts. I am …

Read more

I am slightly bleary-eyed from having spent the night watching the Makerfield by-election count results but I wanted to bring you up to speed on what’s been a very big night for British politics.

It’s a by-election, but it also feels a little bit like a referendum on Keir Starmer’s leadership. And the results were not good for the prime minister.

Andy Burnham has swept to victory, using his speech to declare that “tonight could be the turning point”.

The people of Makerfield will be breathing sighs of relief this morning as they wake up to a day when they will receive no knocks on the door from canvassers. That pile of leaflets can head for the recycling bin now.

So what happened, and what comes next? Here are five things to know.

Subscribe now

Burnham’s win was decisive

Not long after 3am, Labour’s Manchester Mayor was declared the winner with 54.8 per cent of the vote. It was not even close.

Even if Restore, Conservative, Green and Lib Dem votes were subtracted and given to Reform instead, Burnham still would have won this.

Josh Simons won Makerfield for Labour at the general election in 2024 with a majority of 5,399. It’s his resignation, to pave the way for Burnham to return to Westminster (he cannot become PM without being an MP), that triggered this by-election.

Burnham won it with a majority of 9,231. That is a huge swing at a time when Labour are trailing behind Reform in the polls nationally.

MAKERFIELD RESULTS:

Labour: 24,937 (+6,725) - 54.8%

Reform: 15,696 (+2,893) - 34.5%

Restore: 3,111 (NEW) - 6.8%

Conservative: 997 (-3,382) - 2.2%

Green: 308 (-1,468) - 0.7%

Lib Dem: 163 (-2,572) - 0.4%

Just weeks ago, in the May local elections, Reform swept to victory in this area, winning 51 per cent of the vote. This was a titanic loss for the party.

Elections legend Professor John Curtice told BBC News this was the Lib Dem’s worst ever performance in a by-election. On Burnham’s win, he said “in a sense he was riding two horses at once” - trying to appeal to the traditional Labour vote and also appealing to those who want to see the back of Starmer.

One last chance for Labour

Burnham, 56, now rides to Westminster with a case for leadership. He can argue that he’s the man who can overcome Reform’s message that the system is broken and not working for the people.

He wants to turn around the ship following Labour’s missteps since 2024: axing winter fuel allowance for pensioners with zero warning, raising taxes on businesses, fresh taxes for farmers, freebies for Labour MPs including glasses for the PM. These things and more have become dominant in the conversation, not Labour’s wins, such as bringing net migration down by more than 80 per cent from its peak. This is what Burnham will argue: Even the stuff we are getting right is getting lost because people just aren’t listening any more, you need a new man on the mic.

Read more

Read more

There were ugly scenes in Belfast this week as protests over immigration spiralled in…

Read more

There is far more to follow, with the UK government still to announce the results of its consultation into what steps it should take to keep children safe online. This could lea…

Read more

As the Southampton student lies fatally wounded on the ground, handcuffed and struggling to breathe, he repeatedly tells officers he has been stabbed. One officer replies: “I don’t think you have mate.”

Henry drew his last breath shortly after having been a…

Read more

Subscribers to The News List help me keep this newsletter and my work on Instagram going. If you can, please consider upgrading to paid, thank you for your support!

Tony Blair has dropped his biggest politi…

Read more

A lot can happen in a week.

Wes Streeti…

Read more

You’ll find a slightly altered format in this week’s newsletter, which I hope will make it easier to read. Let me know what you think.

Read more

It’s very early in the day for the local election results in England, Wales and Scotland, but there are some key takeaways we can already discuss.

Read more

Read more