Xander Hopkins

SIR KEIR STARMER has triggered total political meltdown by sensationally quitting as Labour leader after dynamic mutiny behind closed doors.

But in a classic Downing Street survival plot, the embattled PM is refusing to pack his bags immediately. Instead, he’s clinging to the keys of No10 as a “caretaker” prime minister until a bitter, blood-soaked leadership battle crowns his successor. He is officially a dead man walking.

The shocking move follows months of brutal backstabbing, plummeting poll numbers, and a vicious civil war within the Labour ranks. Insiders whisper that Starmer’s authority had completely shattered, leaving him with no choice but to jump before he was pushed.

THE FLASHPOINT: Why now?

The final straw came as furious Labour MPs and party activists launched an all-out rebellion. Word on the Westminster street is that the Prime Minister had become “toxic properties” for the party’s future.

With abysmal approval ratings and a growing sense of panic among backbenchers fearing for their own seats, Sir Keir was cornered. Rather than facing a humiliating vote of no confidence, he chose to walk away with a shred of dignity left—but only just.

Pages: 1 2

TECH TITAN Elon Musk is facing the fight of his life as his staggering fortune takes an absolute beating—but the defiant billionaire is already plotting a high-stakes rescue mission.

The controversial Tesla boss and Twitter/X kingmaker has seen his eye-watering net worth violently plummet below the jaw-dropping $1 trillion mark (approx. £790 billion) after a series of disastrous city wobbles.

THE GREAT MELTDOWN – WHY ELON IS BLEEDING CASH

Mega-rich Musk is used to financial rollercoasters, but pals fear this latest belly-flop is a total disaster. The South African-born mogul is locked in a terrifying downward spiral, and here is why his empire is crashing down:

• THE TESLA TORTURE: The electric car giant—Elon’s ultimate cash cow—has taken a brutal bruising. When Tesla shares get a pasting in the City, Elon’s personal wealth gets annihilated in a matter of seconds.

• BIG MOUTH STRIKES AGAIN: Musk’s constant trolling, toxic public spats with journalists, and relentless political point-scoring have left skittish investors running for the hills. For the markets, Captain Chaos is now a high-voltage liability.

• GLOBAL MADNESS: With international crises and global markets in absolute bits, nervous fat-cats are dumping risky tech assets. And everything with Musk’s name on it is currently deemed radioactive.

Pages: 1 2

A secret strategy document is reportedly being shared among council staff in areas now controlled by Reform UK, as officers brace themselves for instability, budget disputes and pressure to abandon existing policies.

The leaked briefing, seen by The Tempest Portal, is said to have been circulated among officers working across the 14 councils taken by Reform in this year’s local elections.

Its message is stark: council professionals should be prepared for sudden reversals, external political pressure and instructions that may come from far beyond the town hall.

According to the paper, decisions in some Reform-run authorities on council tax, flag policies, cabinet responsibilities and public statements have not always come directly from elected local leaders.

Instead, the document claims, guidance has at times been driven by national party advisers, MPs or social media messages from senior Reform figures.

The briefing reportedly warns that inexperienced council leaders can feel compelled to follow central party instructions, even though local authorities are legally independent and must make decisions according to their own statutory duties.

Staff warned to prepare for instability

The document is understood to draw on the experiences of officers in 10 councils that Reform previously took control of.

It warns that some authorities could face an exodus of experienced employees as political tensions grow and major structural changes hit local government.

But it also sets out ways council officers may be able to protect projects that Reform administrations have pledged to cut.

Behind the scenes, staff are reportedly being advised to reframe controversial policy areas using language more acceptable to Reform councillors.

Climate change schemes, for example, could be presented as environmental stewardship, resilience or flood prevention.

Net Zero initiatives could be described as environmental maintenance, while diversity and equality programmes may be repackaged as fairness or community cohesion.

The goal, according to the briefing, is not to mislead elected members, but to ensure legally required and locally beneficial work does not disappear simply because certain terms have become politically toxic.

In one striking example, the paper claims that a Reform-controlled council ultimately delivered more environmental work than previous administrations after officers adopted this approach.

Council reportedly resisted pressure over tax cuts

The alleged briefing also points to a confrontation over council tax.

One local leadership team is said to have resisted pressure from Reform headquarters to cut council tax below what officers considered financially sustainable.

The council stood firm, the document claims, and was ultimately respected for doing so.

The paper reportedly warns that tensions are now emerging not only between Reform-run councils and other local bodies, but also within Reform administrations themselves.

It claims some councillors are beginning to find that promises made at national level do not always align with the financial and legal realities facing their own communities.

The briefing states: “Instability is common,” before warning officers that a decision agreed during the week may suddenly change following contact with national party figures over the weekend.

Pages: 1 2

The ITV daytime programme had only just returned from an advertising break when Susanna Reid told viewers that breaking news had emerged within the previous few minutes.

According to the presenter, 11 trade unions affiliated with the Labour Party had released a statement casting serious doubt over Keir Starmer’s ability to remain leader ahead of the next general election.

Reading from the statement, Susanna said the unions believed it was now clear that the Prime Minister would not take Labour into the next national vote and that arrangements would need to be made for the party to choose a successor.

The announcement came amid further speculation after Wes Streeting was seen entering Downing Street for talks with the Prime Minister.

At the same time, King Charles was preparing to deliver the King’s Speech, outlining the Government’s planned legislation for the forthcoming parliamentary session. But on the ITV sofa, attention quickly turned to the growing pressure surrounding Mr Starmer’s leadership.

Susanna and Ed were joined by Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office, as they questioned him about the apparent crisis unfolding within Labour.

Ed did not hold back as he listed the mounting problems facing the Prime Minister.

He pointed to reports that 90 MPs wanted Mr Starmer to step aside, alongside four ministerial resignations and criticism from council leaders. He then raised the unions’ reported intervention, asking whether the situation had become impossible for the Labour leader to survive.

Ed asked whether the only remaining question was not if Mr Starmer would go, but when he would announce his departure.

Pages: 1 2

It was meant to be a smooth first appearance.

A polished new chief executive. A carefully prepared message. A familiar corporate script about stability, strategy and the road ahead.

But Meg O’Neill’s first public turn at BP did not land like a celebration. It landed like a warning.

Within moments, the tone shifted. This was not the usual soft-focus language of a new boss settling into the chair. It was sharper, colder and far more serious than many expected.

And that is why one line from the address has started attracting attention.

• Not because it was shouted.
• Not because it was dramatic.
• But because it sounded like the kind of sentence that reveals more than it was supposed to.

The line that changed the mood

Every major company tries to control its first impression when a new chief executive takes over.

The lighting is right. The words are measured. The message is usually simple: we are confident, we are prepared, and everything is under control.

But O’Neill’s opening message carried a different charge.

By referring to a difficult and unstable environment, she instantly moved the conversation away from corporate optimism and towards something much more uncomfortable: pressure.

For investors, that sort of language matters. Markets are trained to listen not only to what executives say, but to what they appear to be preparing people for.

And this did not sound like a victory lap.

It sounded like a company bracing itself.

This was not the launch BP expected

There was no open confrontation. No explosive row. No dramatic admission.

But the atmosphere around the remarks felt tense enough to become a story on its own.

It had the quality of a live broadcast moment — the kind where everyone in the studio hears the same sentence and immediately starts wondering what it really means.

Was this just corporate honesty?
Or was it a warning from the top that BP’s next chapter could be far tougher than the public has been told?

That is the question now hanging over the company.

A new boss, but not a quiet start

O’Neill is taking charge at one of the most sensitive moments for BP in years.

The company is under pressure from shareholders. The energy market is shifting. Investors want cleaner numbers, firmer direction and fewer vague promises about the future.

They want to know whether BP will move faster.
Whether it will cut harder.
Whether it will lean back into oil and gas.
And whether the company’s next strategy will be driven by idealism — or cold commercial reality.

Against that backdrop, her first public message was never going to be just a greeting.

It became a signal.

Pages: 1 2

Speaking amid growing concern about the future of work, Bailey said the rapid development of AI and automation is already changing how companies operate, with businesses increasingly turning to machines and digital systems to perform tasks once handled by employees.

His comments were echoed by HSBC chief executive Georges Elhedery, who said generative AI would inevitably remove some roles while also creating new ones. He urged employees not to resist the shift, but to adapt to the changes and use the technology to become more productive.

The debate intensified after Standard Chartered chief executive Bill Winters faced criticism for suggesting that new technology would replace what he described as the bank’s “lower-value human capital”. The remark came as the bank confirmed plans to cut nearly 8,000 jobs.

Halimah Yacob, the former president of Singapore, where Standard Chartered has a major operational presence, called the phrase troubling. James Reed, chairman of recruitment firm Reed, also criticised the wording, saying many workers would be alarmed to hear people described in such a way.

Reed said employees, especially younger workers entering the labour market, are already worried about the rise of AI. He added that companies should handle the transition more carefully and show greater responsibility towards their staff.

Bailey made his comments while giving evidence to MPs on the Treasury Select Committee. He said AI could bring major disruption to the labour market sooner than expected.

According to Bailey, the technology has the ability to remove jobs altogether, particularly in areas such as customer service, where chatbots and automated systems are already replacing human interaction. However, he also noted that AI could create new types of work, including roles linked to data science and technology management.

Bailey compared the rise of AI with previous technological revolutions such as electricity, steam power and the internet. Those innovations transformed economies over long periods of time, often taking decades to fully reshape industries. But he warned that AI may have a faster impact because the technology is advancing at such speed.

Pages: 1 2

Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer is facing a fresh wave of political pressure, as opposition leaders and senior lawmakers demand his resignation following a series of scandals and internal government conflicts. The calls for his departure have intensified in recent weeks, with critics accusing Starmer of mishandling key appointments, failing to control leaks, and allowing personal relationships to overshadow proper vetting procedures in the Foreign Office and beyond.

At the centre of the latest controversy is the sacking of Ollie Robbins, a powerful deputy foreign minister, after a series of clashes with the Prime Minister’s inner circle. Robbins has accused Downing Street of using him as a scapegoat and claimed he was forced out after resisting political interference in sensitive diplomatic matters. His sudden dismissal has sparked accusations of cronyism and a lack of transparency, with opposition MPs arguing that Starmer must take responsibility for what they describe as a “chaotic” government culture.

The row has also reignited the long‑running debate over Peter Mandelson’s controversial appointment as ambassador to the United States. Mandelson, a close friend of the prime minister, has been dogged by renewed questions over his vetting and past associations, including links to the Jeffrey Epstein case. Critics say that Starmer’s decision to appoint him without full disclosure has damaged the government’s credibility and fuelled claims that top roles are being handed out to allies rather than the most qualified candidates.

Pages: 1 2

Millions of UK workers could find themselves paying more income tax in the coming years — even if the Government does not officially raise the headline tax rates.

The reason is a policy known as fiscal drag. It happens when tax thresholds stay frozen while wages rise. On paper, workers may appear to be earning more. In reality, many are simply being pulled into higher tax bands while the cost of living continues to bite.

The personal allowance remains fixed at £12,570, while the higher-rate threshold is still set at £50,270. The additional-rate threshold was cut from £150,000 to £125,140 in 2023 and has remained there.

That means ordinary pay rises can quietly push people into paying more tax — without them necessarily feeling any better off.

Pages: 1 2