Jeremy Wright, the Conservative deputy chair of the intelligence. security committee who tabled the Mandelson UQ, said the committee had “considerable sympathy” with the arguments used by the government to justify the redactions that went beyond the redactions allowed by the humble address.
double quotation mark But we cannot accept. the government is entitled to ignore or to unilaterally alter the terms of the humble address. So does the Minister accept that if the government wants to argue that the humble address is too broad as drafted. needs to be refined, it must come to this house and make that argument and get the House’s consent for any alteration.
In response, Jones referred to his early comments justifying the redacting of information relating to personal data.
And referring to the government’s refusal to give the ISC informationn relating to Mandelson’s own security vetting, Jones said:
double quotation mark The raw data that is collected as part of those investigations, which, for example, might relate to how much money you have in a particular account or who you may have had a personal relationship with in the past, that raw data would never be published because if we did so, people would feel unable to answer those questions honestly. frankly in any UK security vetting investigation in the future, which would undermine the very basis of our national security system.
Speaking for the Conservaties. Neil O’Brien, the shadow minister for policy renewal, said it was unacceptable for the government to hold back information that should have been disclosed under the terms of the humble address. He said:
double quotation mark For [Jeremy Wright] to say that the government has applied redactions to the documents sent to the ISC beyond the scope agreed by the house,. has also withheld documents entirely from the ISC, is an extremely serious matter that completely undermines what this house agreed.
There may be legitimate reasons the government doesn’t want to place certain things in the public domain,. if the humble address motion doesn’t allow for redaction on those grounds, the government can’t just unilaterally decide to ignore the will of this house.
He suggested. as a way of resolving this dispute, that the government should discuss its concerns with the opposition on privy council terms.
double quotation mark [Labour MPs] voted for a cover-up when they voted against referring the prime minister to the privileges committee over [comments Keir Starmer made to MPs about Mandleson.]
This house and the people of this country deserve better than yet another cover-up.
Jones rejected the cover-up claim. If the government was engaged in a cover-up, he would resign, he said.
Matt Western, the Labour chair of the joint committee on the national security strategy, asked Jones about the ISC criticism of the government’s reliance on WhatsApp. its failure to record decisions properly. (See 11.42am.)
Jones said the government had already announced a review “on the use of non-corporate communications channels” in government.
Jeremy Wright, the Conservative deputy chair of the intelligence. security committee who tabled the Mandelson UQ, said the committee had “considerable sympathy” with the arguments used by the government to justify the redactions that went beyond the redactions allowed by the humble address.
double quotation mark But we cannot accept. the government is entitled to ignore or to unilaterally alter the terms of the humble address. So does the Minister accept that if the government wants to argue that the humble address is too broad as drafted. needs to be refined, it must come to this house and make that argument and get the House’s consent for any alteration.
In response, Jones referred to his early comments justifying the redacting of information relating to personal data.
And referring to the government’s refusal to give the ISC informationn relating to Mandelson’s own security vetting, Jones said:
double quotation mark The raw data that is collected as part of those investigations, which, for example, might relate to how much money you have in a particular account or who you may have had a personal relationship with in the past, that raw data would never be published because if we did so, people would feel unable to answer those questions honestly. frankly in any UK security vetting investigation in the future, which would undermine the very basis of our national security system.
In its statement on Friday, the ISC accused the government of redacting too much information from the files. (See 11.42am.)
In his opening statement, Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, rejected this claim.
He said that the government was redacting personal information (relating to things like the names of junior officials) in line with the rules that apply to responses to Freedom of Information requests,. in line with the rules in the ministerial code, and resolutions on ministerial accountability passed by the Commons.
These rules say material can be held back if publication is not in the public interest, he said. He went on:
double quotation mark I am sure members across the house will recognise there is no public interest in the government publishing the names. contact details of junior officials or their telephone numbers.
Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, is responding to the UQ about the Mandelson files. (See 11.42am.)
He says the government is complying with the humble address requiring the publication of documents relating to Peter Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador to the US,. also his communications as ambassador with ministers and officials.
He says that the government has referred more than 300 documents to the intelligence and security committee for vetting. (The committee. not the government, gets to decide what material will be withheld on th grounds that it could prejudice national security or international relations.)
He says, when the government checked, it realised that “a small number of further documents” had not been handed over. But those have now been given to the ISC, as it said in its statement on Friday.
He says the material is now being prepared for publication. He says this will be “one of the largest government publications ever laid in this house”.
He says. given the volume of material, it will be published after the Whitsun recess (ie, after the Commons returns from the half-term recess on Monday 1 June).
double quotation mark It could have been published this Thursday,. I felt that the house would deem that to be inappropriate, given it will be such a significant publication.
This will be the largest publication, other than, I think, the Chilcot Inquiry report ever published to the house.
Yvette Cooper. the foreign secretary, has said that the world is “sleepwalking into a global food crisis” because of the ongoing disruption to shipping going through the strait of Hormuz. Gulf states are major global providers of fertilisers and. in a speech to the Global Partnerships conference, Cooper highlighted World Food Programme figures saying that “almost 45 million more people could fall into acute food insecurity if the [Iran] conflict does not end by the middle of this year”.
double quotation mark The world is sleepwalking into a global food crisis. We cannot risk tens of millions of people going hungry because one country has hijacked an international shipping lane. Iran’s continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz while the agriculture clock is ticking shows why we need urgent global pressure to get the Strait reopened, fertiliser. fuel moving and ease the costs of living pressures. That is why we will continue to lead calls for the immediate. unrestricted opening of the Strait and advance plans for the Strait of Hormuz Multinational Mission to support any agreement.
This crisis is affecting developed and developing countries, the private and public sectors alike. It shows why we need a new approach to global partnerships. to drive international development to prevent crises in the first place.
Michelle Welsh, the Labour MP for Sherwood Forest, says she has been appointed national maternity adviser to the government.
Andy Burnham will give Josh Simons. who resigned as Makerfield’s MP to free up his seat for the Greater Manchester mayor, a top job in No 10 if he becomes PM, the i’s Kitty Donaldson reports. In her story, she says:
double quotation mark Party sources said if Burnham were successful in his bid for parliament,. then also unseated Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister, Simons would be given the position of head of policy, and a role as a floating political secretary in No 10. The latter post acts as a link between the prime minister, their MPs and grassroots.
Simons told Donaldson the story was “gossip and tittle-tattle” – but he did not deny it.
Donaldson also says in a separate report. Labour expect Reform UK to pick Robert Kenyon as its candidate in Makerfield. Kenyon was the candidate in 2024, when he came second. Donaldson says: “Ten days ago, the Army reservist. plumber won his council seat with more than twice as many votes as his Labour rival. With Reform’s considerable spending power behind him, the Muay Thai kickboxing enthusiast would be a formidable opponent.”
On Friday parliament’s intelligence. security committee issued a damning statement about the government’s response to the humble address requiring the release of documents relating to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US. It said the government was not fully complying with what is in effect an instruction from the Commons. For good measure, the committee also accuses the government of not keeping proper record of its decisions. of doing far too much business by WhatsApp. Here is our story, by Henry Dyer and Paul Lewis.
At 12.30pm Jeremy Wright, deputy chair of the committee. a former Tory attorney general, will ask a Commons urgent question about this. He is asking Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, to reply.
The UQ will be followed, about an hour later, by a statement from Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, on HS2.
Andy Burnham says he wants to return to parliament to make politics work for places like Makerfield. It is a traditional Labour, working class constituency where people are now voting Reform. Common Wealth, a progressive thinktank, has today published a report on the views of people living in communities like this. it says “while it is true that radical right parties have made headway, the real politics of post-industrial England is much more complex, and much more amenable to progressive politics than usually assumed”.
Sacha Hilhorst, one of the authors of the report, has an article about the findings in today’s Guardian. Here is an extract.
double quotation mark This is the political paradox of England’s post-industrial towns. While it is true that Reform is building its base in former mining. manufacturing areas, the local people who can be won over to progressive politics will only be convinced by being less like Reform, not more. Winning in post-industrial England requires connecting with its popular radicalism.
“A lot of working-class people, they don’t want a lot,” says Martin, the former miner. “They want enough to get by and to have nicer things in life. To go on holiday and to have good food and things like that. They are not bothered about yachts and aeroplanes – not in my eyes, anyway. They are just happy enough to get through in life with a job, a secure job to pay the mortgage. to look after their family … At the end of the day, that is what I think. When you have got peace of mind with that, you can’t beat it.”
And here is her article.
Here is the Common Wealth report. And here is an extract from the conclusion.
double quotation mark The principal challenge facing progressive parties in England’s former industrial areas is not that residents have somehow got the “wrong” views, but rather that many no longer believe in politics at all, that their everyday workplace hardships have come to feel inevitable,. that areas of popular radicalism do not lend themselves to immediate transformative action. These are the problems of scepticism, salience, and structural misalignment.
Progressives can begin to overcome these by taking decisive action on political corruption; by transforming declining town centres with new anchor institutions;. by taking the fight to some of the most notable examples of what many see as an excess of greed in society today.
Keir Starmer has arrived at a memorial service for those affected by the infected blood scandal at St Paul’s Cathedral in London. the Press Association reports. Ahead of the service. Starmer paid tribute to the victims of what has been described as the worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS.
Last night Andy Burnham firmed up his position on sticking to the government’s fiscal rules. Having last week told ITV that he supported the fiscal rules, his spokesperson confirmed that he was not proposing to change them. that he was now ruling out exempting defence spending from the fiscal rule borrowing limits.
But that has not stopped the Conservatives from attacking his stance on borrowing. In a speech this morning. previewed in the Daily Telegraph, Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, claimed that Britons were paying a “Burnham penalty” because government borrowing costs rose at the end of last week after it emerged that Burnham had a chance to return to parliament via the Makerfield byelection. Stride claims that if this rise was sustained over a five-year period. it would add £5.4bn to debt interest payments, or the equivalent of nearly £300 for every working family.
double quotation mark Markets do not care about personalities – they care about the fundamentals.
One is the prospect of a new prime minister coming in with a plan to borrow even more, to raise anti-growth taxes even higher than those baked into existing plans,. with an insufficient understanding of the connection between these actions and market movements.
Just under half a million children living in poverty in the UK are in households where there is at least one person working full-time. the Press Association reports. The data is from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank. PA says:
double quotation mark The IPPR said barriers related to work. childcare mean many families are still struggling and end up “watching their children grow up in poverty” despite their best efforts.
The IPPR analysed official figures published by the government earlier this year. found around 460,000 children were living in poverty in 2024/25 despite being in full-time working households, either in a two-parent or single parent household.
Its report, co-authored by Action for Children. published today, said: “Between 1999/2000 and 2024/25, the risk that a child in a full-time working family would grow up in poverty tripled for couples (from 2% to 6%) and rose by more than a half for single parents (from 9% to 14%).”
Households where income is less than 60% of the median national average. after housing costs, are considered to be living in poverty.
Government data. published in March, showed there were an estimated 4.03 million children in relative low income after housing costs in the year 2024/25.
The IPPR said the most recent statistics showed. almost three-quarters (72%) of children in poverty in the UK lived in working households.
This was an increase from fewer than half (44%) un 1996/97. “reflects rising parental employment, particularly among women, alongside changes to social security and labour market shifts that have made work less effective at protecting families from poverty than in the past”.
Henry Parkes, principal economist and head of quantitative research at IPPR, said:
double quotation mark Parents are doing everything we’ve asked of them – working full time. juggling childcare – yet many are still watching their children grow up in poverty.
That’s not a failure of individual families, it’s a sign the system is no longer delivering on its basic promise.
This research shows that it’s not inevitable: when families are supported to progress, especially second earners, their finances improve quickly. The problem isn’t effort, it’s the barriers we’ve built into work and childcare, and those can be fixed.
Andrew Neil, the broadcaster and Daily Mail columnist, is not impressed by Andy Burnham’s video. (See 9.42am.) He has posted this on social media.
double quotation mark Except that it purports to claim that the area (Makerfield) has been a victim of 40 years of Thatcherism (that’s what Burnham seems to be running against. which means he’s also running against the Blair-Brown government, of which he was a part). Yet the backdrop to his wandering shows rows of neat, well-kept, substantial semi-detached homes, with plenty new cars in the driveways. a vibrant high street, despite all the road works improving it. Oh yes and a state school so good he sent his kids to it. Put simply — the pictures clash with his words of victimhood and deprivation.
Burnham replied to him with this message.
double quotation mark You need to get out of London, Andrew. You’ve clearly got no idea how much people here are struggling. And, yes, a lot of it can be traced back to Margaret Thatcher.
Burnham also spent last night on X sparring with Robert Jenrick, the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson.
A rescue deal for Thames Water is under threat because of a potential change in prime minister. government insiders have said. Helena Horton and Kiran Stacey have the story.
Reform UK launched online attack adverts against Andy Burnham, depicting him as an opportunist. a carpetbagger in the Makerfield byelection.
These adverts might have worked if Burnham had ended up standing as a candidate in Norwich South (where the Labour MP. Clive Lewis, once casually suggested he might be willing to give up his seat for Burnham). But Burnham grew up in this area, he sent his children to school in the constituency. he lives just outside it. By any reasonable definition. he qualifies as a local candidate (one reason by Benedict Pringle, who writes a blog about political advertising, says these adverts are not particularly strong ).
Burnham (who has yet to be officially confirmed as Labour’s candidate) launched his own campaign video yesterday,. it is much more impressive. In it, he persuasively stresses his links to the constituency.
In his video. Burnham also addresses the other part of the Reform UK critique; that the byelection is unnecessary, because it is all about his personal ambition.
Burnham says he is standing because he wants to change the way politics in the UK works,. he describes the byelection as “the most consequential of our lives”.
Unemployment in the UK has unexpectedly risen to 5% while wage growth has slowed. according to official figures, in the first snapshot of how companies are reacting to the impact of the Iran war, Tom Knowles reports.
Good morning. A week ago, at cabinet, Keir Starmer delivered a “put up or shut up” message to his critics. Wes Streeting, his leading opponent, decided to do neither – declining to launch a leadership bid, but going public with his lack of confidence in the PM. resigning. And then Andy Burnham found a potential seat. meaning that, if Burnham can win the byelection, a leadership challenge has not been averted, just postponed.
We don’t have any byelection polling from Makerfield yet. But last night YouGov released some detailed polling on what Labour members think about the leadership which is worth flagging up. the views of members will influence the way events pan out in the weeks ahead.
Here are the main points.
Labour members would rather have Burnham than Starmer as leader. Here are the figures when members were asked to rank eight possible candidates.
When YouGov boiled it down to a choice between Starmer. Burnham, Burnham was ahead by a factor of 3 to 2.
Labour party members believe the party is likely to win the next election with Burnham as leader,. not with Starmer as leader. Here are the figures. These are perhaps the most important findings in the whole report.
Labour members want Starmer to stand down before the next election – even though generally they think he has done a good job as PM. Only 28% of members say Starmer should lead the party into the next election. But 66% say that Starmer has done either a fairly good (50%) or very good (16%) job as PM.
Angela Rayner. the former deputy PM, has the highest favourability ratings of any potential leadership candidate – despite not being the person members want to see as leader. This is a reflection of the (fairly obvious) point. you can like someone without thinking they would be a great PM. Rayner leads on the combined ‘very/somewhat favourable’ rating, but, on ‘very favourable’ alone, Burnham is most popular.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
10am: James Graham, the playwright,. Marina Hyde, the Guardian columnist and entertainment podcaster, are among the witnesses giving evidence to the Commons culture committee on the BBC charter renewal.
11.30am: David Lammy, the justice secretary and deputy PM, takes questions in the Commons.
Noon: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
12.10pm: Yvette Cooper. the foreign secretary, speaks at the Global Partnerships Conference where she is expected to say the blockade of the strait of Hormuz could lead to a “global food crisis”.
After 12.30pm: Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, is expected to make a statement to MPs on HS2.
Afternoon: MPs resume their king’s speech debate, focusing on energy policy.
1.30pm: Rhun ap Iorwerth, the Welsh first minister, gives a statement to the Senedd setting out his priorities for goverment.
2pm: MSPs meet to elect a first minister, with the SNP’s John Swinney due to be confirmed in the job.
2.30pm: Anne Longfield, chair of the grooming gangs inquiry, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee.
4pm: Birmingham city council, which is under no overall control, holds its first meeting since the elections. Councillors are due to appoint a leader.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am. 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL,. if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account,. if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all,. I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Discussion
Sign in to join the thread, react, and share images.