The Hardacres is a disaster

by

We’re all familiar with the (patronising, problematic) narrative of pulling oneself up by the bootstraps – but Channel 5’s rags-to-riches historical drama The Hardacres stretches that to the nth degree. With its titular family yanking themselves through the ceiling, nay the ozone layer, nay the stratosphere, encountering no discernible friction along the way, the show seems to ask viewers who’ve endured any kind of hardship: what’s your excuse?

In series one, the tedious Yorkshire clan went from Humble Fish Gutters to Minted Millionaires practically overnight, after a workplace injury put their patriarch, Sam (Liam McMahon), out of action, and they pluckily started a herring stall. Now ensconced in luxurious Hardacre Hall, the second series began on tenterhooks, with the mansion’s electricity due to be turned on for the first time. As everyone assembled in the dining room, I braced for some kind of comical mishap or difficulty – silly me! This is The Hardacres; the switch was flipped, and everything worked seamlessly and immediately. Yay…

Electricity sorted, the next promising plot point came with mum Mary Hardacre (Claire Cooper) eyeing up a bicycle, only to be warned that the shape of its seat posed “health implications” for women riders. Gosh, how would she tackle the obstacles – physical, structural and social – between her and her objective? Suddenly, there weren’t any: within minutes, Mary was not just riding herself but presenting her bloomer-clad Ma and daughter Liza with their own bikes, the trio of novices somehow pedalling confidently before you could say “class mobility”.

Nice for them, I guess – but for viewers hankering after some narrative heft, it was a disaster.

Liza Hardacre (SHANNON LAVELLE), Betsy Temple Hardacre (SARAH AGHA) Series 2 S2 TV Still Channel 5
Shannon Lavelle as Liza Hardacre and Sarah Agha as Betsy Temple Hardacre (Photo: Channel 5)

On its most basic level, storytelling works by presenting protagonists with an obstacle; their evolution (or dissolution) in trying to overcome it is what fleshes out a narrative. The writers of The Hardacres seem to have gotten only half that memo: again and again, a likely looking problem was thrown into the mix, only to be resolved before characters could get so much as a nibble, let alone sink their teeth in. Rather than the foundations of a good story, we were treated to a list of events – almost impossible to invest in emotionally.

Liza couldn’t find a suitor she liked – oh wait, that handsome soldier at the pub looks like a good bet. The maid mucked up the kitchen orders because she can’t read – don’t worry, Mary’s already got her a tutor. And when a recession threatened the Hardacres’ empire, Sam decided the family should pivot from herring shops to general stores, and that was that: as Mary said, “We took a chance before and it paid off, we can do it again.” Sure – but if “taking a chance” really is all it takes to succeed in this weird parallel universe, better not let your struggling workers hear you, otherwise Victorian Yorkshire will be awash with dockers-turned-herring-magnates in five seconds flat.

The only redeeming feature of The Hardacres (or at least, the one plot point permitted to stretch beyond its opening episode) came in the form of Lady Imelda Hansen (Michele Dotrice) – the visiting mother of the Hardacres’ frosty neighbour Emma (Cathy Belton). Having played the kindly old lady all episode, her mask-drop at the end was delicious: “I want to make an example of them – a warning to anybody who thinks that they can buy class,” she said of the Hardacres. “They’ll be back down those docks before they know what’s happened.”

Imelda Hansen (MICHELE DOTRICE) Series 2 S2 TV Still Channel 5
Michele Dotrice as Imelda Hansen (Photo: Channel 5)

At last, some narrative impetus! I relished Lady Imelda’s dastardly reveal – not just because something was finally happening, but because I wholeheartedly shared her desire to take the Hardacres down a peg or two. Of course, my impulse doesn’t come from faith in some pre-ordained class system – just, how dull a story it makes for anyone to prevail ad infinitum, particularly when victory is so easily won, as though all that separates struggling people from success is the merest inkling of effort.

Hell, if that were true, the feat of sitting through the episode’s neo-liberal fantasy should have netted me a herring empire – or at least a rollmop or two.

‘The Hardacres’ continues next Thursday at 9pm on Channel 5

The community of 76,000 given chance to shape UK’s future

by

If Andy Burnham wins in Makerfield, after Reform tore through the area last week, it will be seized as proof he can hold back the turquoise tide. Lose, and Keir Starmer will argue that it’s not so easy after all.

It’s a big responsibility for 76,000 people, half of whom turned out to vote last time.

Makerfield is the by-election that will shape Britain’s future. Activists from both parties will besiege residents, in these working-class suburbs between Wigan and Leigh. Keep an eye out for which Cabinet ministers turn up to knock doors for Burnham.

Nigel Farage’s story about the undeclared £5m gift he accepted from a crypto tycoon is evolving. First, in an attempt to spoil another paper’s scoop, he told the Telegraph that it was a personal gift to pay for security for the rest of his life. (He has faced repeated attacks.) “This money was given to me so that I would be safe and secure for the rest of my life.”

Now Farage gives The Sun a slightly different explanation, describing the £5m as a reward for his Brexit campaign: “This was given to me on an unconditional basis, completely unconditional basis. But frankly, it was given as a reward for campaigning for Brexit for 27 years.”

The rules say MPs must declare any potentially relevant gifts received in the 12 months before they enter the Commons.
He denies wrongdoing.

Over to Parliament’s ethics watchdog, which is investigating.

X: @olyduff

‘S**tshow at the f**k factory’: Inside Streeting’s plan B

by

On Wednesday evening – hours before Wes Streeting’s resignation – his allies were out in the Commons bars searching for more Labour MPs to support his bid to topple the Prime Minister.

Rival MPs in Keir Starmer’s camp had been claiming all week that the health secretary did not have the 81 names required to officially challenge the leader – a claim strongly disputed by Streeting’s allies.

But whatever the truth of the competing spreadsheets, Labour MPs were thin on the ground in the Strangers’ Bar and on the Commons terrace because many were being lobbied by the Prime Minister himself, who was hunkering down not very far away in his parliamentary office.

Shorts

By Thursday morning, uncertainty over the size of Streeting’s would-be leadership army fuelled the sense in Westminster that the health secretary’s bid, after days of briefings from his allies that he was ready to go over the top, was melting away.

Chancellor pleads not to ‘plunge the country into chaos’

Just after 7am on Thursday morning, Rachel Reeves – who is sticking by the Prime Minister – made her first intervention on Starmer’s leadership crisis.

In extraordinary scenes live on BBC Breakfast, in the street outside No 10, the Chancellor warned Labour MPs they had an “important decision to make today” not to “plunge the country into chaos” when the economy was showing signs of improvement with 0.6 per cent growth, even in the shadow of the Iran conflict.

Reeves’s comments drew comparisons with the late Queen Elizabeth II’s subtle but pointed intervention on the eve of the Scottish referendum in 2014, when she warned voters should “think very carefully about the future”.

If there were any Labour MPs who were already wavering about whether or not to back Streeting, the Chancellor’s decision to highlight unexpectedly optimistic economic news may have focused their minds.

Just after 9.30am, NHS England published more good news for the Government: figures showing the 18-week target for waits had been met and that the overall waiting list fell by 110,000 in March, the biggest monthly drop outside of Covid since 2008 and despite strikes by doctors.

Streeting responded to the news, saying the Government’s plan for the NHS was working and adding the phrase that he has used twice in the past week – which could become the working title of his leadership campaign: “Lots done, lots more to do.”

Streeting’s brutal assessment of Starmer

Throughout the morning, allies of the PM – who had been briefing earlier in the week that Streeting was “bottling it” – continued to claim that the Ilford North MP “doesn’t have the numbers”.

As the hours ticked by, Westminster was awash with rumours that the challenge was off and that, perhaps, he was not going to resign after all – despite his allies insisting earlier in the week that he would.

One Labour staffer was savage about the apparent delay from Streeting, telling The i Paper: “He [Wes] is f**ked and he is clearly trying to force the PM to resign so he doesn’t have to.

“Wes is finished. No one in Cabinet will have anything to do with him after this. If he had any self-awareness he’d resign at the end of all this, but given his behaviour thus far, there’s scant evidence that he has.”

Yet, finally, at 12.58pm, Streeting’s X account tweeted his resignation letter. It was brutal in its assessment of Starmer – whom he had told in their brief meeting on Wednesday morning that he no longer had confidence in his ability to lead the party into the next election.

Streeting told the PM in his letter: “Where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need direction, we have drift.”

Insiders say there was no wavering or dithering by Streeting and that he was always going to wait until after the King’s Speech, to avoid any distractions or overshadowing the monarch’s set piece constitutional moment, and after he had responded to the good news of falling NHS waiting lists.

Streeting resorts to plan B

Yet despite its devastating critique of the Prime Minister, the Streeting letter stopped short of fully challenging the PM to a contest, which only continued to fuel speculation he does not actually have 81 MPs on his side.

On Wednesday, allies of Streeting had briefed The Times claiming that he was poised to both resign and challenge the Prime Minister – suggesting he has since resorted to a plan B.

It is possible, and his allies do not dispute this, that some of the names on his spreadsheet include ministers who are still serving in Starmer’s Government, and who do not want to resign yet – but would back Streeting if he declared he was standing.

Despite being a close political ally and personal friend of Streeting, Peter Kyle is not following him out the door of Cabinet, The i Paper understands. Allies of the Business Secretary said he was not planning to resign.

Under Labour rules, the ex-minister can declare he is challenging the Prime Minister without securing the 81 names, and then wait to see if MPs come forward to back him. At that point, once 81 names are submitted, the ballot is triggered.

Streeting’s supporters insist he does already have the numbers but wants to have an open contest with as many people on the pitch – including Andy Burnham – so he can have a proper mandate to govern as PM.

Someone close to Streeting said the penultimate paragraph of his 998-word letter – in which he talked about the contest needing to be broad and have the “best possible field of candidates” – made clear why he did not want to challenge yet.

Any leader elected without allowing the best candidates to stand would lack legitimacy, they said, adding: “Wes doesn’t believe in stitch-ups.”

A separate source close to Streeting added in the wake of his decision to quit as health secretary: “He has been so frustrated about the lack of debate within Cabinet. He will now be in a position to lead the debate about what a proper Labour government, with proper Labour values, can do.”

And a third ally said Streeting is demanding the Prime Minister find a way to allow Burnham back into Parliament to allow a leadership contest to take place with “all the players on the pitch”.

“It’s principled,” one ally said.

‘Ball now in Starmer’s court’ as MP makes way for Burnham

“And the ball is now in Keir Starmer’s court to find a way back for Andy in short order.”

But there is nevertheless scepticism within the party about whether Streeting’s claim to want a full contest, that includes the incredibly popular Greater Manchester Mayor, is just a ruse because he calculates that Burnham would be blocked anyway by Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) if he tried to get a seat.

A Labour insider said: “That is potentially what is happening, but I am choosing to take his words at face value – I think he has accepted he doesn’t have enough support and that an election without Andy having had the opportunity is a short-term win, long-term loss.”

Just after 5pm, it appeared that Burnham’s return to Westminster politics had moved a step closer – even though he still has many hurdles to overcome.

Josh Simons, the Labour MP for Makerfield, announced he was stepping down specifically in order to let Burnham stand for Parliament.

But Simons secured only a 5,399 majority in 2024, and with Reform UK – which won all the council seats in the area in last week’s elections – in second place, it is not certain that Burnham would win.

He also needs to have the green light from Labour’s NEC – who blocked him from a similar return earlier this year – to be able to stand as a candidate, and then would need to be selected as the party’s candidate.

And one party source suggested the chaos was reflecting badly on Labour and the Government, comparing it to an episode of Succession, the TV series about siblings warring over their father’s global media business, entitled “Shit Show at the F**k Factory.”

Streeting stokes Labour anger

A Labour staffer was more pointed: “He quite simply didn’t have the numbers and he knew it. I was told he had about 30 backbenchers and 50 ministers and that simply doesn’t take you to where you need to be. People aren’t going to resign for him.

“He can now be a gobby backbencher or maybe if he behaves himself, he can get back into Cabinet. That is the most he can hope for.”

A Cabinet source said: “The rest of the Cabinet were really cross about this and thought it had gone too far. He had marched too many people up the hill, to sacrifice themselves, for this not to be the final outcome.

“He spent most of last night trying to persuade Cabinet ministers to join him to force the PM into resigning but none would join him.”

But Streeting’s camp refuted the claim that he was calling Cabinet ministers as “totally false”, adding that most of the Cabinet had already told the Prime Minister he should go.

A left-wing Labour MP said: “He never stood a chance. We would’ve made his life a misery and the party ungovernable.”

A Labour insider said it would not be enough for Streeting to secure the backing of 81 Labour MPs, but that he would need the support of more than double that figure to show the party that he could govern well, without the risk of resentment from the back benches.

This de facto mandate was all the more important because Labour was in office, they said.

The insider said: “Eighty-one MPs is the absolute floor of even getting on to the playing field. But in a party where his side of things is in the minority in Parliament and even more so in the country, he needs to have momentum, not just the bare minimum.

“How quickly can he get to 150, 175? That’s what he would need to show the party [that] there is a growing consensus behind him.

“I appreciate the focus is on whether a contest happens, but we’re talking about the prime minister of the country, not just the leadership of the party.

Rayner open to Cabinet return

by

Angela Rayner has not ruled out a return to the Cabinet, according to allies.

Sources close to the former Deputy Prime Minister said she will give No 10 “a hearing” if they offer her a job in the Cabinet following the resignation of Wes Streeting as Health Secretary earlier today. However, they confirmed that no approach had yet been made by Downing Street.

Rayner’s allies claim that if she were to return, she would like to become Education Secretary – a brief she shadowed in Opposition and “enjoyed enormously.” This would mean moving Bridget Phillipson, the current Education Secretary, to another post within Cabinet, with some tipping her to become the new Health Secretary.

Shorts

There has been widespread speculation that the PM could bring Rayner back to serve in his top team after she was forced to resign over her tax affairs last summer.

However, that option has now become more viable after she was cleared of tax avoidance by HMRC. The Labour MP stepped down as Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary last September when the independent ethics advisor found she had broken the ministerial code after admitting that she had underpaid stamp duty on an £800,000 flat in Hove, which was considered to be her second home.

On Thursday Rayner announced an HMRC investigation had cleared her of any wrongdoing after concluding she had not sought to avoid paying the correct stamp duty on the purchase of the property in 2025.

Back in December, Starmer said the “hugely talented” Rayner would make a return to Cabinet. However, by bringing her back into the tent now, it could help to shore up his support – even temporarily – among the party’s soft-left MPs, many of whom are believed to be supporting his leadership rival Andy Burnham.

One ally said: “I think she would go back in [to Cabinet] and will keep her powder dry for now. However, I think the price she will ask for sitting in Cabinet again will be an agreement that Burnham will be able to return to Westminster.”

Burnham announced on Thursday afternoon that he will be requesting approval from Labour’s ruling body, the National Executive Committee (NEC), to stand in a by-election in a bid to return to Westminster. The by-election was triggered after Josh Simons stepped down as Labour MP for Makerfield to allow Burnham to run for Parliament.

Another Rayner supporter cautioned that she may turn down the job if offered. They said that she still felt “very bitter” about the way she was treated by Starmer and his former chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney prior to her resignation. “She was very upfront with them about her tax affairs,” they claimed.

Another Labour source also said they would expect Starmer to offer a Cabinet job to Rayner as a way of bringing her back into Government – but questioned how likely it would be that she would accept given it would require loyalty to the PM.

“It is a huge call for her, whether to take it or not”, one insider said. If Rayner were to reject the offer the next obvious choice for Starmer would be Lucy Powell, who replaced Rayner as Deputy Leader of the Labour Party when she was forced to resign, a Government source said. They suggested Starmer did not have enough authority to begin a full-blown reshuffle of his Cabinet.

Rayner has long been seen as one of Starmer’s potential leadership rivals. However, her supporters have repeatedly said that she would not move against him and would likely only enter the race if Streeting triggered a contest.

Behind the scenes, the soft-left have been privately war-gaming what would happen in the event a leadership contest was held before Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, was able to return to Westminster. It is understood that a decision was made to coalesce around one candidate in order not to split the vote, but no formal agreement had been made on whether that candidate would be Rayner, or Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary.

A source close to Rayner said: “Nothing was locked in because there were just too many variables to consider.”

There is no guarantee the NEC will allow Burnham to stand, although The BBC reported that Starmer will not try to block him, or that he would win the by-election. Simons currently sits on a majority of just over 5,000 with MPs supportive of the Prime Minister, who have constituencies in the surrounding area pointing out that Reform UK won every council seat available in the area in last week’s local elections.

I’m an HMO landlord – here’s why Reform’s ban won’t work

by

Reform UK’s plan to crack down on houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) could drive up local rents, create more homelessness and even cost councils more money, landlords say.

Local election gains by Nigel Farage’s party have sent shockwaves through the rental sector, as its politicians pounce on anti-immigration fears that multi-bedroom terraced houses are being used to house asylum seekers.

But HMO landlords and housing experts told The i Paper that these converted properties are badly needed by students, professionals and homeless people.

Shorts

Blocking HMOs could also lead to landlords trying to claim six-figure sums in compensation, they say.

‘Bloody-minded’ Reform will impose HMO controls, warns Farage

Farage claimed during the local election campaign that asylum seekers being removed from hotels were being placed in HMOs, and promised that “bloody-minded” Reform councils would stand up against HMO planning applications.

The Reform-run Durham County Council has already led the way with its widespread planning crackdown, imposing an Article 4 order across the whole borough last year.

This order requires landlords to seek planning permission to convert their properties into HMOs, allowing councils the right to refuse consent and making it much harder for landlords to convert traditional homes into HMOs.

In St Helens in Merseyside – where Farage’s party overturned a Labour majority this month – Reform has promised to bring in an Article 4 order to “force all HMOs to go through planning”.

Britain's Reform UK leader Nigel Farage reacts next to newly elected councillors at the Havering Town Hall, following the results of the local elections, in the London Borough of Havering, Britain, May 8, 2026. REUTERS/Jack Taylor TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
Nigel Farage with newly elected councillors in the London Borough of Havering (Photo: Jack Taylor/Reuters)

Elsewhere, Reform councillors like George Madgwick in Portsmouth and George Finch in Warwickshire have led local opposition to HMOs housing asylum seekers.

Madgwick previously told The i Paper it was “despicable” and “morally corrupt” for landlords to sign asylum accommodation deals with Home Office contractors.

Reform MP Lee Anderson previously said HMOs were “filling our streets full of wrong ’uns”, suggesting a Reform-led Government could introduce further licensing requirements for HMO owners.

‘Unintended consequences’ of restricting HMOs

Wendy Whittaker-Large is a Reform councillor for Alsager Town Council in Cheshire who owns HMO flats, which she says she rents out to professionals. She also runs the HMO Action Group, an advisory group for landlords.

She urged party colleagues to step back and properly understand the sector before imposing new policies, telling The i Paper she had written to Reform deputy leader Richard Tice to warn against any “draconian” crackdown by councils.

Wendy Whittaker-Large, a Reform councillor who is also a HMO landlord (Photo: Supplied)
Wendy Whittaker-Large, a Reform councillor who is also a HMO landlord

“Restricting this kind of housing would be a backwards step,” she said of Article 4 orders. “It seems draconian. I worry it would be a de facto ban [on new HMOs].

“Reform-run councils may not understand the unintended consequences. If you squeeze supply that’s needed, where do people live?”

Many students and professionals “need an affordable shared house”, Whittaker-Large added, arguing restricting supply of HMOs could push up rents for an entire area.

Councils often use HMOs for temporary accommodation, so local planning blocks could lead to “more homelessness, more people turning up to councils for emergency help”, she also warned.

Reform UK did not respond to a request for comment.

Asylum housing ‘only small part’ of HMO sector

Paul Preston and Sylwester Noga, whose property business owns several large HMOs in Chorley in Lancashire, said they have faced misinformation and abuse in recent years as HMOs become a political lightning rod.

The landlords say they’ve had far-right TikTokers filming outside their properties, even though they say their HMOs are let to professionals, not asylum seekers.

“Not all HMOs are the same – asylum contracts are only a small part of it,” Preston said. “Some in Reform don’t seem to be making that distinction.”

Squeezing the HMO sector will “reduce much-needed supply and push up rents”, Preston said, also voicing fears of a “de facto ban” by Reform councils on HMOs.

Mark Wade, a Reform councillor at Lancashire County Council – which his party won last year – has claimed that the region has “more illegal immigrants dumped on it than anywhere else in the country”.

Wade previously told The i Paper that it was “unfair” for all HMOs to be “tarred with the same brush”, but said the “root cause” of the increase in HMOs was asylum seekers.

Renters’ Rights Act pushing some into asylum deals

Almost 73,000 asylum seekers are housed in “dispersal accommodation” in communities across the country, according to 2025 Home Office statistics. But the figures don’t break down how many HMOs were used.

Even if the vast majority of these homes are HMOs, it would still represent a relatively small proportion of the 497,000 HMOs estimated to exist across England and Wales.

However, property experts said landlords are becoming increasingly attracted to asylum housing deals with Home Office contractors such as Serco and Mears.

Landlords previously told The i Paper they had turned to these contracts at least partly because of the new Renters’ Rights Act because they are more lucrative and easier to manage.

Since the Home Office’s contractors take over responsibility for moving migrants in and out, landlords don’t have to worry about Labour’s new eviction controls.

Whittaker-Large suggested that the Government could create a new HMO planning category specifically for asylum accommodation to allow local blocks on that kind of housing.

“The problem isn’t HMOs,” she said. “The problem is we haven’t built enough houses, and huge levels of immigration.”

Reform UK warned of costly compensation claims

It could also be expensive and time-consuming for Reform-run councils to issue blanket planning refusals, said Rosalyn Trotman, a partner at Thrings law firm.

Trotman, who works in the planning team, said it can be “potentially costly” for councils to remove HMO development rights with less than 12 months’ notice.

She said her firm was in touch with rejected HMO developers looking for “six-figure sum” compensation. If compensation can’t be agreed, cases can be escalated to land tribunals, she added.

Paul Shamplina, founder of Landlord Action, said he hoped councils won by Reform won’t impose blanket bans on new HMOs.

“We have a housing crisis in every part of the country. Cracking down on HMOs and squeezing the sector won’t help with that.”

“HMOs aren’t bad,” said Xavier Archbold, who owns four HMOs in Leeds that he lets out to professionals. “They give people a useful, cost-effective housing option, which is important during the current cost of living crisis.”

Starmer is finished – there’s only one question now

by

Wes Streeting’s resignation letter to Keir Starmer is an enigma wrapped in a mystery. It is a classic of its type: a statement written almost entirely in Labour code, which never openly states any of its core messages but relies on context, absence and euphemism to impart its meaning. But there is, no matter how opaque it appears, meaning in there. He has provided the first glimpse of a shared approach to leadership change among Starmer’s opponents.

Until now, the Prime Minister’s main defence has been the division of his enemies. Obviously, his potential challengers were divided on who they wanted to succeed him. But more importantly, they were also divided on the process by which he would be replaced. Streeting wanted a quick one, which would allow him to run before Manchester mayor Andy Burnham could get back into parliament.

Burnham, for obvious reasons, wanted the opposite. Until that fundamental issue is resolved, soft left support cannot concentrate around a candidate. It means Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband are in contorted, hesitant positions, not knowing where they stand. A contest without Burnham naturally pushes them backward, one without him pushes them forward.

This situation began to resolve itself today. Once you battled your way through the formalities of the Streeting resignation later, one passage stood out.

“It is now clear,” he wrote, “that you will not lead the Labour party into the next general election and that Labour MPs and Labour unions want the debate about what comes next to be a battle of ideas, not of personalities or petty factionalism. It needs to be broad, and it needs the best possible field of candidates.”

For all the nonsense rumours and the herd movements of this week, that is a concrete moment with concrete meaning. It is a very clear sign that Starmer’s critics are now starting to share a view on the process for replacing him. This puts us in a fundamentally different position to where we were earlier this week. And it means that time is running out for Starmer.

Why did Streeting write that? God knows. Perhaps he really believes it. People will scoff at this, but politicians really do have principles and they hold tightest to those principles which suit their self-interest. If Streeting has a head on his shoulders, he’ll know that the only way a figure on the right of the parliamentary party can manage it as leader is to win in a full and fair engagement with the soft left. A quick and dirty coup was never in his long-term interest even if it was in his short-term interest.

Alternatively, it may be tactical. Perhaps he doesn’t have the 81 MPs needed to start a leadership challenge. If so, he may be able to secure them by encouraging the soft-left to help him kick-start a leadership process.

Perhaps he is actually targeting Burnham – effectively encouraging him to break cover and confirm whether he is or is not coming back, so that a leadership contest can begin. Or perhaps he is working with him, in tandem, the two teams jointly agreeing how a timetable might work as a way of forcing Starmer out and breaking the deadlock.

We don’t know. What we do know is that Starmer’s critics now agree broadly on a process. The one candidate whose incentives pointed towards a quick stitch-up has given up on the idea and accepted that a bigger, broader and possibly longer system is needed. That might be months long and involve Burnham getting back into parliament. Or it might be shorter and involve Rayner or Miliband instead. But either way, the right and the soft left of the party are now speaking the same language of Starmer opposition.

This obviously all looks very chaotic and dispiriting. It’s easy to lose all sense of hope in sober progressive government when it seems to behave just like the drunken reactionary government which preceded it. It’s frustrating to watch a devastating story about Nigel Farage’s £5 million gift disappear because it cannot compete with the drama in the government.

But let’s be realistic about where we are. This is happening. Starmer is finished. If he was ever going to demonstrate the vision and the capacity for change it would have been in his speech on Monday morning and he failed. It is simply not possible for a Labour prime minister to maintain authority when nearly 100 of their MPs have called on them to go, senior Cabinet figures are resigning, and the unions have turned against them. Whatever we might individually think of Starmer, it’s over. So the question is not whether it should be done but how it is done.

This must not happen again. The next leader must succeed and must establish a firm and broad power base in the party. They must show they have the ideas and the quality to govern. It is therefore encouraging that even the man whose incentives pointed towards a quick and cynical process has now accepted that it needs to be more restrained and meaningful. It offers the best chance of a decent outcome.

For all the smoke and the gunfire, things are gradually becoming clearer. Starmer’s opponents are slowly reaching a joint position on process. And that changes everything.

The lesser-known hacks to lower your blood pressure

by

This is Everyday Science with Clare Wilson, a subscriber-only newsletter from The i Paper. If you’d like to get this direct to your inbox every week, you can sign up here.

Hello, and welcome back to Everyday Science.

I don’t normally cover disease “awareness days”, appointed by medical charities to bring their topic extra focus and funding. But my attention was caught by the British Heart Foundation’s current campaign around May Measurement Month.

This is a drive for everyone to get their blood pressure measured, and the charity has used the occasion to release a check list of eight steps for lowering blood pressure – some of which may be less well known.

High blood pressure is said to be the single biggest modifiable risk factor for poor health in developed countries, such as the UK. It raises the risk of heart attacks, strokes and several other conditions, and yet may go unnoticed for years.

People may be put off getting their blood pressure checked if they are reluctant to start taking medicines but, as the BHF checklist highlights, there are several lifestyle changes you can make that might mean you don’t need medication.

Most of them are well known – like losing weight and cutting down on salt – but here are some you may not have heard of. (The full BHF checklist is at the end of this article.)

Think about potassium, not just sodium

Most people are aware that blood pressure can be lowered by eating less salt, a.k.a. sodium chloride. That’s because sodium is a key mineral in body fluids and its concentration in the blood cannot be allowed to get too high.

“When you have too much salt in your blood, your body tries to dilute it,” said Dell Stanford, a BHF dietitian. That greater volume of fluid within our blood vessels is what raises blood pressure.

But there’s a relationship between the body’s sodium levels and potassium, another mineral. If we consume more potassium, it helps the body get rid of sodium in the kidneys.

Potassium is found in fruit and vegetables, especially bananas, avocados and leafy greens, as well as beef, chicken, oily fish and dairy products.

Many low-sodium forms of table salt replace some of the sodium with potassium, and this may help explain why they reduce blood pressure. People with kidney problems are advised not to use these salt substitutes, though.

The BHF also recommends people don’t take potassium tablets unless medically advised to do so, as it can disturb the heart rhythm. “Too much can be harmful,” said Professor Bryan Williams, chair of medicine at University College London.

Dairy’s back on the menu

Calcium is usually seen as something to help keep bones strong, but it also helps lower blood pressure. The mechanism is unclear but it may be because it boosts sodium excretion, like potassium. It may also help in relaxing and widening blood vessels.

But calcium may not be the only reason why studies show a correlation between dairy consumption and lower blood pressure.

Milk contains a group of related compounds called dairy peptides, which trials have shown relax blood vessels by blocking production of a hormone called angiotensin II. This is the same way ACE inhibitors, an important class of blood pressure drugs, work. “Dairy foods are unique in that you’ve got all of these things going on,” said Stanford.

The BHF advises people to include dairy in their diet for this reason, even as dairy foods are not usually seen as heart healthy. They advise, however, that people choose lower-fat options, like semi-skimmed or skimmed milk, to avoid saturated fat, which may increase cholesterol levels, causing plaques that raise the risk of heart attacks.

Brilliant beetroot

Nearly every source of healthy eating advice recommends that people eat plenty of fruit and vegetables. But the latest BHF report singles out a group of produce that is high in compounds called nitrates.

Beetroot is particularly high in nitrates, with other good sources including spinach, kale, celery, strawberries and bananas.

The body converts nitrates into a hormone-like compound in the body called nitric oxide, which relaxes the muscles in blood vessels and so widens them. (This is the same hormone boosted by the erectile dysfunction drug Viagra, which works by opening up blood vessels to the penis.)

“As soon as you’ve got open arteries, the blood pressure will drop,” Stanford said.

Blood pressure drugs in disguise

Another study released this week points to an alternative approach to blood pressure control, involving medicines usually seen in a different light.

People taking weight loss jabs experience a fall in their blood pressure about the same as when they start taking a specific blood pressure drug, according to research released at the European Congress on Obesity.

Merging the results from 32 large-scale trials of the slimming jabs showed that people had a reduction in their systolic blood pressure of about 5 millimetres of mercury, on top of weight loss.

The figures showed that only about three-quarters of the impact was a result of the weight loss, suggesting the jabs also had a direct effect on blood pressure through some other biological mechanism.

“These findings support a meaningful role for [weight loss injections] in blood pressure management in overweight and obesity,” said the researchers, led by Dr Marcel Muskiet at Leiden University Medical Center in The Netherlands.

Eight steps to blood pressure control from British Heart Foundation

  • Check your blood pressure
  • Regular exercise
  • Five portions of fruit and veg daily
  • Include dairy in your diet
  • Cut down on salt
  • Moderate your drinking
  • Manage weight
  • Take medicines as prescribed

I’ve also written

Eating too many meat substitutes like veggies sausages and burgers could potentially harm your health because they contain food toxins usually found only in hot countries.

These “mycotoxins” develop mainly in tropical or subtropical regions, when mould starts growing on crops like grains, nuts, beans and fruit. But mycotoxins were found in over 200 plant-based meat substitutes sold in British supermarkets, according to a recent investigation.

I’ve been reading

For my book club, I have been reading Julia, by Sandra Newman, set in the world of George Orwell’s classic, 1984, but written from the perspective of the female lead, Winston Smith’s girlfriend.

To prepare myself I reread 1984 and the one way it disappointed was the sparse details around how that Britain became such an authoritarian communist state. Newman gives her imagination free reign, and her alternative history is riveting – and entirely believable.

While Labour implodes, Farage is battling a scandal that could cost him everything

by

Almost every pair of eyes in Westminster this week is focused on the cascading chain reaction of events that seems sure to end Keir Starmer’s premiership – though whether in a matter of hours, days or weeks remains anyone’s guess.

For all that some of the Prime Minister’s remaining fans try to dismiss that story as “drama”, it is deeply consequential: the dissatisfaction of Labour MPs with Starmer could mean the country has a new prime minister by summer, with a new policy agenda that could influence the lives of everyone in the country. Sometimes, internal party drama really matters.

But there is a second British political story bubbling underneath that could prove just as consequential over the course of the next few years, and it doesn’t concern Labour at all – instead, it centres around Nigel Farage.

Just over two weeks ago, the Guardian revealed that Farage had accepted a personal gift of £5 million from Thailand-based crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne. This was only weeks before he decided to return to UK politics as leader of Reform UK and stand, successfully, for parliament.

Farage has tried to dismiss the donation – a huge gift in the context of UK politics – as both a personal matter and a non-story. He has said that the donation was to pay for his personal security and as such, was not political and did not need to be declared under Parliamentary rules. He has brushed off, with increasing peevishness, any attempts by journalists to question him further about the matter.

If this was an attempt to try to get past the story and hope it got forgotten among the noise caused by Labour’s implosion, it has not succeeded. Parliamentary rules require new MPs to declare any gifts they have received in the previous 12 months if they might be politically relevant – and £5 million from a major donor to the party you lead seems to fit that criterion.

Complicating the position for Farage further is that his team declared other, much smaller, donations towards his personal security, but not this one. On Thursday afternoon, Sky News revealed that Farage had completed the purchase of a £1.4 million property shortly after receiving Harborne’s gift, though a spokesman for Reform noted the purchase had “commenced” before it was given.

Farage is now subject to a formal investigation by the parliamentary standards watchdog over the gift, at which he will find it much more difficult to continue avoiding the awkward questions he has failed to answer so far. This is a political scandal that could continue to dog Farage for weeks, if not months.

Contradicting his previous position that the gift was entirely about security, Farage has claimed the donation was “given to me on an unconditional basis” and added “it was given as a reward for campaigning for Brexit for 27 years”.

But it could easily become even more serious than that. The parliamentary standards watchdog is able to recommend sanctions against MPs, which are then voted on by a special committee of MPs. These can include suspensions from parliament, which ban an MP from speaking or voting in the chamber for a set period – not something that on its own would necessarily bother Farage, who only sporadically turns up to vote.

However, if an MP is suspended for 10 days or more, voters in their constituency are able to trigger a recall petition. If 10 per cent of eligible voters in that constituency sign the petition, it in turn triggers a by-election – in which Farage would be eligible to stand as a candidate, but which he’d have to win to keep his seat.

Farage won his Clacton seat in 2024 with a comfortable 8,400 majority, and Reform is performing better in the polls today than it was then. But the feverish attention of a by-election, combined with a scandal-hit Farage – and the possibility of a unity candidate standing against him – could make it the fight of his political life.

Politicians and the media are right to be giving most of their attention to Starmer and Labour’s woes, as they could decide who is prime minister next month. But Farage’s scandal won’t go away either – and depending on how it pans out, it could matter just as much: if things go wrong for him, Farage might soon find himself in just as much political trouble as Starmer is in now.

Retro kits and sales in Mexico

by

Two years ago, Hummel promised to deliver the Rolls Royce treatment after agreeing the biggest kit deal in Sunderland’s history.

Despite record sales and critical acclaim, they are not in the mood for a victory lap.

Instead a recently inked long-term extension to the original five-year deal, which represents a significant uplift for the Black Cats to reflect their Premier League status, appears to have focused minds at the Danish kit manufacturer.

“When we first started talking to Sunderland I felt there was something special there but it’s turned out to be even bigger than we could imagine,” Hummel UK chief executive Neil Burke tells The i Paper.

Part of that is local sales, which have increased year-on-year but “are yet to reach their ceiling”.

But an equal amount is what Burke calls “the connection”, fans queuing round the block for replica kits and responding to a firm that has committed to “100 per cent bespoke designs” for the club every season.

Regis Le Bris has the Black Cats purring in the Premier League (Photo: Getty)

Globally, Sunderland shirt sales have also spiked since a return to the English top flight.

There is now a roaring trade in Mexico for example, while Burke says there has been a brisk take-up among shirt collectors.

He says he wants to “carry on the momentum” with next season’s strips.

The first kit to launch is slated for a June release while the others will follow in July and August.

Hummel are planning activations to coincide with the club’s US tour, all part of Sunderland’s desire to grow their global brand.

While the home kit will always be red and white, Hummel will “play around” with patterns and shirt collars to give the kit a point of difference.

Burke flags the away kit as “one we’re really, really excited about”.

The bold design will be eye-catching but also has a story behind it that he believes supporters will instantly connect with.

Sunderland fans can expect bold innovative designs like never before (Photo: Getty)

Hummel are also planning two “retro drops” that will be a play on the period between 1988 and 1994 when Sunderland previously played in the brand’s famous chevrons. 

While speculating on designs and leaks is part of the supporter experience, kits actually matter for the club.

Under the Premier League’s new financial rules, Sunderland’s spending will be capped according to revenue – so Hummel committing more money to the partnership is significant.

“We thank the club for backing us because they would have had other offers but they’ve stuck their neck out and gone for Hummel,” Burke says.

“We felt the partnership could be big but it’s turned out even bigger than either side thought so our financials of what we’re offering have increased. We feel that is justified with how things have gone in the last two years.

“It’s fair to say commercials are different when you’re in the Championship and Premier League so we felt it was only right to pay that worth back to Sunderland now they’re established in the Premier League.”

Read more

Long-term the aspiration at Hummel – who recently signed Bournemouth to their stable of clubs – is to become part of Sunderland’s “brand”, perhaps even into the late 2030s or even 2040s.

“We’ve recently signed the extension but I’d love to go even further than that into the 2030s and beyond,” Burke says.

“Why not? There aren’t many bigger clubs in the country than Sunderland.”

Streeting has set a trap for his rivals – and it could blow up the race to No.10

by

Like in a game of tennis, Wes Streeting just very firmly lobbed the ball into Angela Rayner’s court.

Rayner had dropped a breakfast time 130mph serve when she revealed HM Revenue and Customs – with exquisite timing – had cleared her of any wrongdoing. That ace meant she was free to return to Cabinet. Or she could choose to stay on the backbenches ahead of a leadership contest when it officially starts, even though it effectively started after Labour’s local elections drubbing last week.  

Streeting resigned as health secretary at lunchtime when it became clear he could not last the day as a senior member in Sir Keir Starmer’s Government. Goaded into sacking his troublesome minister, Starmer neither had the authority nor inclination to do so. The Prime Minister’s Monday reset speech had further damaged his standing.

“Where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need direction, we have drift. This was underscored by your speech on Monday. Leaders take responsibility, but too often that has meant other people falling on their swords,” Streeting wrote in his resignation letter.

Those who dislike Streeting had watched his team’s machinations on Thursday morning with barely-disguised Schadenfreude as they speculated he did not have the required 81 MPs to challenge Starmer. “He’s f***ked it,” one Cabinet aide said, succinctly.

“First rule of briefing is: keep it vague,” laughed one ally of Starmer, amused at the efforts of Team Wes to persuade journalists that Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, was telling MPs that Starmer would quit. When asked, Jones’s spokesman vehemently denied it. By late morning, there was a distinct sense that the wheels were falling off Streeting’s efforts.

The received wisdom had been that Streeting would benefit from a speedy contest with an Angela Rayner under a tax cloud. Now she’s back in the game, the stakes have changed. And Streeting is nothing if not street smart.

In his resignation letter, Streeting wrote that it is now clear Starmer will not lead Labour into the next general election. The succession contest “needs to be broad, and it needs the best possible field of candidates. I support that approach and I hope that you will facilitate this,” he urged Starmer.

By quitting Streeting is daring Rayner to accept a job in Starmer’s dying administration. He’s also fronting up Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, telling him to put his money where his mouth is. His dare to Burnham is: find a seat, win it, come to Westminster, win the leadership contest too. The trap has been laid for both of them.

Starmer has long made it clear he wants Rayner back in Cabinet. Frankly, he needs her more than she needs him. The job as health secretary needs filling, even if the prime minister doesn’t have a full reshuffle. Rayner will need to explain herself either way. Does she prop up Starmer’s dying administration and protest she is loyal to the Labour movement? Or stay on the backbenches where she is free to engage in the leadership race without being bound by collective responsibility?  

Meanwhile, Streeting’s allies insist he has over the 81 names needed to challenge Starmer. But, as one explained, better a tactical retreat now to win in the longer-term. Another said Burnham needed greater scrutiny before “people in the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] see through him.”

Streeting’s support is also concentrated among serving ministers. There would have to be an open contest for ministers to abandon collective responsibility to swing behind him. And Labour’s socialist wing have made no secret of how much they loathe Streeting.

“He definitely has the numbers but if he had directly challenged [Starmer], all this would have become is the ‘Stop Wes’ campaign,” an ally of Streeting told The i Paper.

“He would’ve become the lightning rod for everyone who wanted to chuck everything at him. He has put his career on the line; now it’s time for others to do the same. By holding back until Wes moved, Ange thought she was being clever. Now she has questions to answer about whether she thinks Keir should stay on. Wes has put his head on the line. What do other Cabinet ministers think? And where the hell is Andy in all this?” the source added.

Streeting might also benefit from Starmer blocking Burnham from standing for Parliament through the National Executive Committee, making it a clear fight between him and Rayner.

But that’s before you take into account all the hopefuls who will come out of the woodwork to raise their profiles. Veterans minister Al Carns – with his soundbites about “leadership,” “action” and photo ops with grappling irons up frozen waterfalls – is about as politically subtle as a rifle, but is nevertheless gaining traction in his naked bid to become defence secretary.

And as the leadership race creaks into gear, albeit more slowly than first expected, Starmer clings on. It’s been over 300 days since the prime minister’s popularity rating first dipped below net -40. His four predecessors all left office within weeks of consistently becoming that disliked.

Labour lost 59 percent of the seats it was defending at local elections and control of the Welsh Senedd and yet Starmer clings on. The number of his own MPs calling for him to go remains at 92, where it had been sitting for 24 hours, equivalent to nearly a third of backbenchers. And yet he clings on. Four ministerial resignations, five ministerial bag-carriers blown away in a puff of smoke and resignation letters.

Now Streeting resigns and still Starmer clings on. But the ball is in Rayner and Burnham’s court now.