🔗 Share this article

"It's scarcely been the government's strongest 24 hours in government," a high-ranking official within the administration conceded following internal criticism in various directions, openly visible, plenty more in private.

The situation started with unnamed sources to the media, this reporter included, suggesting Sir Keir would oppose any attempt to challenge his leadership - and that cabinet ministers, such as Wes Streeting, were plotting challenges.

Wes Streeting maintained his loyalty remained to the PM while demanding the individuals responsible for the briefings to be sacked, with Starmer announced that all criticism on his ministers were "unacceptable".

Questions about whether Starmer had authorised the first reports to expose potential challengers - and whether the individuals responsible were acting knowingly, or consent, were added amid the controversy.

Was there going to be a probe regarding sources? Could there be terminations in what the Health Secretary described as a "poisonous" Number 10 setup?

What could individuals near the prime minister aiming to accomplish?

I have been numerous discussions to piece together the real situation and in what position these developments leaves the Labour government.

There are crucial realities at the core of all of this: the government has poor ratings as is Starmer.

These circumstances act as the rocket fuel behind the ongoing conversations I hear concerning what Labour is trying to do about it and what it might mean regarding the duration the Prime Minister continues as Prime Minister.

But let's get to the fallout of this political fighting.

Damage Control

The PM and Health Secretary Wes Streeting spoke on the phone on Wednesday evening to resolve differences.

I hear the Prime Minister expressed regret to the Health Secretary during their short conversation and they agreed to speak more extensively "in the near future".

They didn't talk about the chief of staff, the prime minister's chief of staff - who has emerged as a lightning rod for blame ranging from Tory leader Badenoch in public to Labour figures at all levels in private.

Generally acknowledged as the mastermind of Labour's election landslide and the tactical mind guiding the PM's fast progression since switching from Director of Public Prosecutions, he is likewise subject to scrutiny when the Downing Street machine seems to have stuttered, stumbled or outright failed.

He is not responding to media inquiries, amid calls for his head on a stick.

His critics argue that in government operations where McSweeney is called on to handle multiple important strategic calls, he must accept accountability for the current situation.

Others in the building maintain no-one who works there was behind any briefing targeting a minister, post the Health Secretary's comments whoever was responsible must be fired.

Aftermath

Within Downing Street, there exists unspoken recognition that Wes Streeting conducted a series of scheduled media appearances recently with grace, confidence and wit - although encountering continuous inquiries about his own ambitions as those briefings concerning him occurred shortly prior.

Among government members, he showed flexibility and media savvy they only wish the Prime Minister possessed.

Additionally, observers noted that certain of the reports that attempted to shore up Starmer resulted in a platform for Wes to declare he agreed with from party members who have described Downing Street as toxic and sexist and the individuals responsible for the reports should be sacked.

Quite a situation.

"My commitment stands" - Streeting denies plan to oppose the PM for leadership.

Official Position

The PM, I am told, is "incandescent" regarding how the situation has developed and examining how it all happened.

What appears to have malfunctioned, from No 10's perspective, involves both quantity and tone.

Initially, they had, possibly unrealistically, thought that the briefings would produce media attention, rather than wall-to-wall headline news.

Ultimately far more significant than they had anticipated.

It could be argued any leader permitting these issues become public, by associates, under two years following a major victory, would inevitably become headline significant coverage – precisely as occurred, across media outlets.

Additionally, concerning focus, they insist they didn't anticipate considerable attention about Wes Streeting, later massively magnified via numerous discussions planned in advance the other day.

Alternative perspectives, it must be said, determined that that was precisely the purpose.

Broader Implications

This represents further period during which government officials mention lessons being learnt and on the backbenches numerous are annoyed regarding what they perceive as a ridiculous situation developing which requires them to firstly witness and then attempt to defend.

While preferring not to these actions.

But a government and its leader whose nervousness concerning their position is even bigger {than their big majority|their parliamentary advantage|their