Defenestration has become the modus operandi in politics, instead of MPs working through the real issues of the day
Does the United Kingdom really need a new prime minister? In particular, does it need Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner or Ed Miliband, reportedly lining up to replace Sir Keir Starmer?
The answer is surely no, not now and not after whatever the May elections may indicate. A change of government not even two years in office cannot be in the national interest. Yet Britain’s political community appears to be cohering round just such a defenestration. It seems the only way it knows how to hold power to account, giving it the seventh leader inside a decade. Parliamentary democracy is dysfunctional.
First, let us deal with Peter Mandelson. Starmer made him Washington ambassador. The Foreign Office questioned his security clearance but did not impede it. With hindsight, both decisions might have been handled differently. As the Jeffrey Epstein case unfolded, Mandelson’s friendship with the man proved fatal. He was sacked, and now, after further revelations about the vetting process, the head of the Foreign Office, Olly Robbins, has been sacked as well. Matter surely closed.
Costly failures in judgment happen far too often – the Post Office scandal, the Grenfell fire, the overcrowding of A&E corridors and the collapse of NHS dentistry. Billions of pounds are regularly wasted by Britain’s rulers. Many doubtless die because someone somewhere did not say something to someone else. Such matters are seldom debated in parliament and rarely for long. They are boring, complicated and win no headlines.
