Jonathan Freedland

Besides, they want him there to be the lightning rod, as in to take the blame for the bad results.

It's badly timed from their point of view.

a better time from his point of view.

I also do think there's a worry that this actually, I think there's not a sense of how this is playing publicly.

Is it process?

Is it Westminster Village?

Is really the only thing that truly cuts through the fact of appointing Mandelson in the first place and maybe that damage was already done.

I haven't had the chance to speak to

many Labour people since in the last just minutes since Starmer has sat down.

But before now, what I did pick up was a sense that this was not good.

It was another black mark against the prime minister, but without there being an appetite to terminate his prime ministership now.

Instead, there's a feeling with him whenever you talk to people, it's not whether it's when, but not right now.

It tells us a lot and not much of it is good.

It tells us that he delegates to a great extent a lot of what would be considered not just political decisions, but very specifically prime ministerial decisions.

Often you have to arbitrate as prime minister between conflicting arguments that are made by cabinet members, civil servants.

You're the final court of appeal.

Decisions come to you for a final ruling.

This would have been one of those decisions.

But a lot of people who watch this very closely say that he just really discourages that.

He doesn't like people bringing him dilemmas.