Isabel Hardman

Isabel Hardman

Isabel Hardman is assistant editor of The Spectator and author of Why We Get the Wrong Politicians. She also presents Radio 4’s Week in Westminster.

Starmer’s King’s Speech response bore little resemblance to reality

Like the rest of the King’s Speech, Keir Starmer’s address on the government’s legislative agenda had been prepared long before the turmoil in his party, and therefore bore little resemblance to reality. The Prime Minister did make a few joking references in his opening lines about the list of people endorsing Naz Shah’s book – adding that it was finally a list that everyone could get behind. But he largely spoke as though he were not hours away from a potential leadership challenge – or as though there were sections even of this speech that his own party wasn’t fully on board with.

Jess Phillips’s resignation will be particularly painful for Starmer

All three of the resignation letters from ministers who have quit government in the past couple of hours will be painful for Keir Starmer, but Jess Phillips’s will hurt the most. The Safeguarding Minister makes a series of accusations against the Prime Minister which he will find personally hard to take. They cut right to the heart of why his premiership has failed. She describes him as a ‘good man fundamentally, who cares about the right things’, with the inevitable criticism following straight after: ‘however I have seen first-hand how that is not enough’.

It’s all too late for Keir Starmer

Keir Starmer’s big survival speech could never be big enough to save him as Prime Minister. Whether he ends up getting the push now or later in the year has very little to do with what Starmer said today – he has been cooked for a while. But if this really had been the make-or-break speech that it has been billed as, it wouldn’t have worked, either. It largely served to highlight Starmer’s weaknesses further. Starmer really didn’t have much analysis bearing out his claim he had ‘learned a lot in the first two years in the job’ of Prime Minister It wasn’t just that he filled the speech with meaningless phrases such as ‘delivery is of course essential, but it’s not sufficient on its own to address the frustration voters feel’.

LIVE: The Fight for the Right | Nick Timothy & Claire Coutinho vs Danny Kruger & Matt Goodwin

28 min listen

The Conservative party was once the natural political home for those on the right. No longer. The Tories’ vote share collapsed at the 2024 general election and the party, under new leadership, has since been outflanked by Nigel Farage’s Reform UK. Earlier this week, The Spectator pitted the Conservatives, represented by Nick Timothy and Claire Coutinho, against Reform UK, represented by Matt Goodwin and Danny Kruger, for the definitive debate on which party truly represents the future of the right. Listen to an excerpt of that debate here, and for more The Spectator events go to spectator.

LIVE: The Fight for the Right | Nick Timothy & Claire Coutinho vs Danny Kruger & Matt Goodwin

‘Bring back shame!’ – is Britain’s social contract broken? | with Trevor Phillips

45 min listen

In this week’s podcast, William Moore is joined by The Spectator’s economics editor Michael Simmons, assistant editor Isabel Hardman and Times columnist and Sky News presenter Trevor Phillips. The panel unpacks Mary Wakefield’s cover story on the rise of shoplifting – and what it reveals about’ shameless Britain’. After a Morrisons manager was reportedly sacked for stopping a thief, they ask whether petty crime, fare-dodging and everyday rule-breaking are eroding the social contract.Also on the episode: Tim Shipman’s latest piece on Labour after Starmer.

‘Bring back shame!’ – is Britain’s social contract broken? | with Trevor Philips

Keir Starmer hasn’t done enough to save himself

The final Prime Minister's Questions of a parliamentary session is often quite a demob-happy affair with a pantomime atmosphere. Today's, though, was more important for Keir Starmer, who is now in a daily battle to show that he's still got enough support to keep going a bit longer. He didn't have a bad session, but as with many of the events in the Commons this week, it won't make much difference to his longevity.  Badenoch's opener drew a contrast between the start of the parliamentary session, when 'sycophantic' Labour MPs had asked Starmer supportive questions, and this week, when the 'Prime Minister was reduced to begging those same MPs to save his own skin'.

What is the argument for keeping Keir Starmer?

For something that’s apparently only a ‘desperate political stunt’, Keir Starmer is taking the looming vote on whether to refer him to the privileges committee pretty seriously. There is a gargantuan effort tonight underway behind the scenes to persuade Labour MPs not to vote for the referral that the Tories want to make, with Labour grandees including Gordon Brown making public statements of support for the Prime Minister. This effort may pay off to the extent that the Tories only get to say to voters on the doorstep that their Labour MP blocked an investigation into the Prime Minister. But as with all prime ministers who reach this level of ‘embattled’, it only delays the inevitable.

‘When, not if’ – who will move against Starmer?

12 min listen

It will come as no surprise that Keir Starmer appears to have heard a very different evidence session from Sir Olly Robbins to the one everyone else thought the ex Foreign Office mandarin gave yesterday. The Prime Minister arrived in the Commons for questions today convinced that Robbins had in fact largely backed him up, give or take a few quibbles over whether there was a ‘dismissive’ attitude in Downing Street towards Peter Mandelson’s vetting. What planet is the PM on? Eyes were fixed on his front bench, with journalists looking for any chinks in the armour after a couple of very unconvincing media rounds from usually loyal hummers Ed Miliband and Pat McFadden, but will anyone actually move against Starmer? Oscar Edmondson speaks to James Heale and Isabel Hardman.

'When, not if' – who will move against Starmer?

Did Keir Starmer watch the same Olly Robbins as me?

It will come as no surprise that Keir Starmer appears to have heard a very different evidence session from Sir Olly Robbins to the one everyone else thought the ex Foreign Office mandarin gave yesterday. The Prime Minister arrived in the Commons for questions today convinced that Robbins had in fact largely backed him up, give or take a few quibbles over whether there was a ‘dismissive’ attitude in Downing Street towards Peter Mandelson’s vetting.  First, though, he had to deal with a question about whether Downing Street had wanted Matthew Doyle to get an ambassadorial post. His lawyerly answer confirmed this at length: ‘Matthew Doyle worked for many years in public service, for me as prime minister and other ministers.

Olly Robbins hits back over Mandelson’s vetting

Sir Olly Robbins dropped a series of political bombs throughout his evidence session on Peter Mandelson to the Foreign Affairs Committee. Like all civil servants, he did so in exactly the same calm, polite tone of voice as he would have used when talking about something boring, but the content of that evidence was anything but. It was seriously damaging for Keir Starmer – and it wasn’t just about Mandelson. The former permanent under-secretary at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) told MPs within minutes of starting his session that, when he began the job, ‘I walked into a situation in which there was already a very, very strong expectation’ that Mandelson needed to be in America ‘as soon as possible’.

Lee Anderson and Zarah Sultana are two sides of the same coin

What a funny pair Lee Anderson and Zarah Sultana are: so vehemently opposed to one another’s politics and yet so similar in the way they operate, right down to getting sent out of the Commons this afternoon for calling the Prime Minister a liar. Anderson was first up with his question: ‘The problem the Prime Minister has got is no one believes him. The public don’t believe him, the MPs on this side of the House don’t believe him. His own gullible backbenchers don’t believe him. Does the Prime Minister agree with me he’s been lying?’  By asking a question containing unparliamentary language, they ensured that Starmer didn’t have to answer it at all The Speaker demanded that he withdrew the word ‘lying’, as it is considered unparliamentary language.

Mandelson latest: can we trust Starmer’s ignorance?

20 min listen

The Peter Mandelson scandal just got more scandalous. Last night the story broke that Mandeslon actually failed his enhanced vetting before being made US Ambassador. Number 10 are pleading ignorance. Their defence sits on the suggestion that the Foreign Office’s most senior official unilaterally decided to ignore the findings and – what’s more – that he told no one. It’s a stretch and, as Tim Shipman says MPs' 'fury is overwhelming'. There are a number of outstanding questions, including: what could possibly be in it for the FCDO to withhold this key information? Now Sir Olly Robbins has been sacked, will he go public? Did Starmer knowingly mislead parliament when he said that the vetting process was followed?

Mandelson latest: can we trust Starmer's ignorance?

Why won’t Starmer answer the question!?

13 min listen

PMQs is back and – predictably – Lord Robertson’s intervention on the state of the armed forces dominated proceedings. The Prime Minister gave six responses to questions about defence spending, none of which addressed the criticism properly. While it was not a painful session for Starmer, it did show how little he has to say and how little authority he seems to have over such a serious matter. Why can’t he just answer the question? Does he want to be back in opposition? Megan McElroy speaks to Tim Shipman and Isabel Hardman. Produced by Megan McElroy and Oscar Edmondson.

Why won't Starmer answer the question!?

Starmer wants to ask, not answer, the questions at PMQs

Keir Starmer gave six responses to questions about Lord Robertson’s defence spending comments today, none of which addressed the criticism properly. Kemi Badenoch rightly chose to focus all her attacks at Prime Minister’s Questions on the speech by the author of Labour’s strategic defence review, opening with the line from Robertson about a ‘corrosive complacency’ on defence. He replied: The Speaker intervened to remind Starmer that this was Prime Minister’s Questions, rather than questions to the Leader of the Opposition ‘Let me start by saying I respect Lord Robertson. And I thank him again for carrying out the strategic review. My responsibility is to keep the British people safe and that is a duty I take seriously, that is why I don’t agree with his comments.

Why I still watch PMQs

Is Prime Minister’s Questions past it? We frequently ask this question in Westminster when the Wednesday lunchtime ding-dong between the two party leaders has ended up being particularly low-rent – and it has definitely fallen into that category over the past few months. Today, Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch return for their first post-Easter session, and even if this one goes unusually well, it’s likely we’ll be having the same existential crisis about what the point of PMQs is again. In the 15 years that I’ve been covering politics, I’ve definitely sat through worse periods of PMQs than the one we are currently enduring.

Will Starmer fix any of Britain’s big problems?

George Robertson’s critique of the government’s reluctance to commit to proper defence spending is deeply politically inconvenient for Keir Starmer. This is not just because the Prime Minister has tried repeatedly to claim that Labour is the party that is protecting the armed forces – while holding onto Ben Wallace’s ‘hollowed out’ line about the Tories as a comfort blanket. But the speech that the co-author of the strategic defence review will give tonight also highlights the government’s failure to reform welfare, with one of the pre-trailed lines being ‘we cannot defend Britain with an ever-expanding welfare budget’.

Is Britain falling out of love with the NHS?

Why is Wes Streeting launching a report that argues the NHS doesn’t need to change its funding model? The Health Secretary gave a speech this morning at the IPPR to mark a new analysis of whether social insurance systems automatically lead to better health outcomes. The answer, according to the report’s authors at least, is that they don’t and that overhauling the funding source of the NHS would not solve its most serious problems.  Its analysis ‘confirms the finding of other studies: no group of health systems systematically outperforms another’, but it is not exactly complimentary of the NHS itself.

A&E is buckling under the mental health crisis

Mental health provision is totally inadequate in this country: we already know that. But you can only really understand quite how badly broken it is by looking at how much other public services are creaking as a result. Take the report today from patient safety watchdog the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB), which warns that mental health patients stuck in emergency departments in England are at risk of significant harm because they can currently leave of their own accord, even when staff deem them too sick to be on their own.

Antonia Romeo takes on the civil service

12 min listen

The new cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, has published a list of objectives setting out her vision for what the civil service will look like under her. Many have interpreted it as her tightening control over government ... especially since Darren Jones stepped back from his Downing Street role. The path is clear for her to become the Prime Minister’s ‘principal policy adviser’, and to reform the civil service ‘so that it is recognisable for excellence in delivery, innovation and improved productivity’. Is this all just word salad, or is she onto something? James Heale speaks to Isabel Hardman and former Foreign Office diplomat Ameer Kotecha. Produced by Oscar Edmondson.

Antonia Romeo takes on the civil service

Should we brace for another financial shock?

Britain’s response to the conflict in Iran is dominating Westminster – but is Keir Starmer really keeping the country out of war? After a tense Liaison Committee appearance exposed divisions over defence spending, pressure is also mounting on the government’s economic strategy. With energy prices rising, mortgage products disappearing and fears of inflation returning, how prepared is Labour for the fallout? James Heale speaks to Isabel Hardman and Michael Simmons.

Should we brace for another financial shock?