Adam Boulton: Are we in for one of the ‘dirtiest’ election campaigns ever?

Published

2 years ago

January 28, 2024

admin

There was general agreement at the Institute for Government’s Annual conference last week that it would be a good thing for Britain if this year’s election campaign is not “dirty”.

This highfalutin notion was shot down in seconds with equally universal assumption by the assembled politicians and policy wonks that “that is not going to happen”.

A clean campaign would concentrate on policies and competence.

A dirty campaign is built around slurs, distortions and untruths, with those competing for votes slinging mud at each other.

A lot of factors, headed by booming social media, are coming together to suggest that this year we may see one of the dirtiest election campaigns ever.

The IFG delegates had to wait less than a day for their forebodings to come true. There might have been a lot to talk about at Prime Minister’s Questions.

The Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) bill struggling through parliament. The world order threatened by ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, Israel and the Red Sea.

Record NHS waiting lists are the public’s number one concern. The chancellor is contemplating two rounds of tax cuts.

But no, the leader of the opposition chose to exchange personal insults, much of it based on dubious content circulating on smartphones.

Fair’s fair, Sir Keir Starmer started it this time, but Rishi Sunak had a well-stocked pile to fling back.

Starmer opened up referring to a couple of brief unofficial clips posted online. One showing the prime minister “collapsing in laughter when he was asked by a member of the public about the NHS waiting lists”.

The other “accidentally record[ing] a candid video for Nigel Farage“.

Sunak, who seldom passes up a chance to brand Starmer as a lefty London lawyer, shot back that he is “the man who takes the knee, who wanted to abolish the monarchy, and who still does not know what a woman is”.

Previously Starmer “chose to represent a now-proscribed terrorist group” Hizb ut-Tahrir, and “served” Jeremy Corbyn.

Both men knew that the insults they were sticking on each other were essentially unjustified distortions of the other, but that was what they chose to put on the national agenda at the most scrutinized moment of the political week.

Starmer has explicitly changed his party and his previous positions.

Under scrutiny, he has clarified and explained each of the specific acts detailed. It is a core principle of British justice that advocates are not surrogates for their clients.

Sunak was not laughing at the people he was talking to and spoke to them properly after the end of the clip.

The alleged greeting to Farage was repurposing an online meme which allows any name, in this case “Nigel”, to be put into the prime minister’s mouth.

Neither Sunak nor Starmer are classic alpha males.

Sunak comes across as a whiny or petulant geek, Starmer seems hesitant, overcautious and inclined to blame others.

Perhaps this is why they feel the need to overcompensate by acting rough and tough. Sir Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, also has his moments of fabricated machismo.

The leaders set the tone and their petulance has been picked up in the campaigning efforts of their underlings and supporters.

Prime minister Boris Johnson took up an online distortion that Starmer had failed, when he was director of public prosecutions, to take action against Jimmy Savile.

This prompted the senior Downing Street aide Munira Mirza to resign protesting that this was “not the normal cut and thrust of politics”.

It soon would be. Labour cited Johnson’s attack as justification for their later personalised digital poster attacks on Rishi Sunak including the smear that he “doesn’t think adults convicted of sexually abusing children should go to prison”.

Since then Keir Starmer has gone out of his way not to back down or apologise; following the code of the playground he promises to punch back hard against any attacks.

At the start of election year he rejected an invitation from Beth Rigby to take up Michelle Obama’s famous recommendation: “When they go low, we go high”.

Instead, he told Sky News’ political editor: “If they want to go with fire, we will meet their fire with fire”.

Donald Trump crafts insults – Lyin’ Ted, Sleepy Joe, Ron DeSanctimonious – with cruel genius and gets away with fabulations.

There is only one Trump; honest political strivers should not try to copy him.

Opinion polls after personalised attacks usually show that support for both sides goes down, though more for the target than the attacker.

This should give all the party leaders something to think about, especially since public respect for politicians is at a record low and a low or differential turnout could be a major factor.

Starmer needs to mobilise enthusiasm for his leadership, not dent it. Sunak’s standing is already low and doesn’t want to drop further.

This government raised spending limits for the election campaign to £35m. Much of it will go on direct messaging to voters – which is harder to police than election broadcasts and billboards.

During the 2019 campaign, the Conservatives spent over a million on Facebook, much of it on messages disparaging Jeremy Corbyn.

Both Labour and Conservatives are already spending over a million a month on Facebook advertising.

Then there is what partisan supporters choose to put up on social media independently.

Labour has already advised its supporters to use humour.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Even without explicitly taking sides humourists such as Coldwar Steve and Trumpton, liked and retweeted, can make some political weather, often by lowering the tone.

Political propagandising is much more equal opportunity than it used to be. Anyone can post.

On the other hand, the newspapers and other mainstream media no longer have a near monopoly.

In 1997 when The Sun ran its famous “Nightmare on Kinnock Street” and “Will the Last Person to Leave Britain Please Turn Off the Lights” attacks on Labour, the paper’s circulation was 3.9 million.

The last official figures released were 1.2 million in 2020.

Poster launches used to be major events in political campaigning, but who would bother with them today?

There are some worthwhile lessons to be learned from the classics.

The Saatchi brothers are celebrated for their attacking of billboards: Labour isn’t working, Labour’s tax bombshell and Labour’s Policy on Arms (showing a combat soldier surrendering hands up).

Each of these were masterpieces of wit and effort compared to the Conservatives’ adoption of the BBC newsreader caught giving the finger for “Labour when you ask for their plans to tackle immigration”.

The Saatchis’ best work riffed with precision on policy rather than personal insults.

When the Conservatives tried that with their “New Labour, New Danger” demon eyes poster it misfired; it was difficult to convincingly portray Blair as a devil when other Conservative sources were attacking him as an inexperienced Bambi.

Labour boobed depicting Cameron as a cute bicycling chameleon.

The most effective attacks at PMQs cut directly to the political issues facing the voters, rather than scuffling around in their past record for something compromising.

Mrs Thatcher struck directly and seemingly spontaneously at Michael Foot: “Afraid of an election is he? Afraid? Frightened? Frit?”.

“Weak, weak, weak,” Tony Blair gutted John Major. “You were the future once.”

Sunak, Starmer and their teams of advisors have yet to produce anything as authentic.

Something which would crystallise the political moment.

Instead, they and we can look forward to a year in the dirt as they scrabble around trying to find it.

UK

‘Victory for Virginia’, says family of Prince Andrew’s accuser – as royal gives up all his titles

Published

5 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

'Victory for Virginia', says family of Prince Andrew's accuser - as royal gives up all his titles

The family of Virginia Giuffre has said Prince Andrew’s decision to give up his titles, including the Duke of York, is “vindication for our sister and survivors everywhere”.

“This is not just a victory for her, but for every single survivor of the horrific crimes perpetrated by [Jeffrey] Epstein and his co-conspirators,” they said in a statement.

Andrew will no longer be known as the Duke of York, in a move which finally completes his banishment from royal life. However, he will remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

His former wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also no longer use her title of The Duchess of York, it is understood.

In a statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

Why is this happening now?

The decision comes following increased pressure on Prince Andrew after continuing reports of his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, and his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

The posthumous memoir of Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, is due to be released on Tuesday. She had accused Andrew of sexual assault, and sued him in August 2021.

The book will go on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”, three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

On Friday evening, the US House Oversight Committee also released documents from Epstein’s estate showing “Prince Andrew” listed as a passenger on the financier’s private jet – the so-called Lolita Express – from Luton to Edinburgh in 2006, alongside Ghislaine Maxwell.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said Sky News royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

What is Prince Andrew giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title
His knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO)
His Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter
Christmas with the Royal Family at Sandringham
He had already stopped using his HRH title and and was stripped of military patronages by the Queen in 2022
He will retain his dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it
He will also remain a prince as he was born the son of Elizabeth II

It is understood the changes will take effect immediately, with the Giuffre family calling for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

King ‘glad’ of the outcome

The King is glad of the outcome, it is understood, and the decision was taken in close consultation with His Majesty and other members of the Royal Family.

Andrew will continue to be known as Prince Andrew and will remain living at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge.

The move does not impact the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

For the second year running, he is not expected to attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham.

‘An unwelcome distraction’

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills said: “This is quite an extraordinary move. I think it shows that, actually, things had gone too far.

“Prince Andrew, and allegations about him and Virginia Giuffre, were continuing to be too much of a distraction for the Royal Family.”

Jack Royston, chief royal correspondent at Newsweek, told Sky News: “This does not go far enough.”

There should be an acknowledgement from the Royal Family, he said, “irrespective of whether Prince Andrew denies the substantive allegations against him [that] it was morally wrong for him to grovel to Jeffrey Epstein”.

The Guardian’s former royal correspondent Stephen Bates also told Sky News: “He’s shown no sign of any sort of contrition. He continues to deny all the allegations against him. And he speaks of his duty to the family. Well, it’s a bit late to be thinking about that.”

What is Prince Andrew accused of?

Prince Andrew has denied allegations made by Ms Giuffre – one of Epstein’s victims – of sexual assault.

She had filed a civil lawsuit against him, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on three occasions after she was introduced to him by Epstein.

In a 2019 interview with BBC Newsnight, Andrew said he had no knowledge of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, claiming a well-known image of them together had been doctored.

The case was settled outside court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Following Ms Giuffre’s death in April, aged 41, her family said she “lost her life to suicide” at her farm in Western Australia.

Giuffre’s family: ‘Victory for Virginia’

In a statement, the family of Ms Giuffre said they supported Andrew’s decision but repeated accusations that he had made misleading statements. Andrew has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

Analysis: Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt that his brother must have said enough was enough.

UK

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

Published

5 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew giving up titles was clearly not entirely his decision

It is extraordinary that it has come to this but the distraction had to stop.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his “duty to my family and country first”.

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says “in discussion with the King”, we’re left in no doubt his brother must have said enough was enough.

The fact we’re being guided that the King is glad of this outcome says it all; for the monarch and the wider family, the questions of what they were going to do about Andrew had to stop.

After years of upset caused by his association with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, he has done the family one favour by personally announcing that he will no longer use his titles.

For the King to forcibly remove them would have taken up precious parliamentary time and weeks of column inches.

To be clear, his titles aren’t removed, they remain extant but inactive like his HRH title.

But Andrew won’t use them any more, and that will be humiliation enough for a man who has already been stripped of his military affiliations, his charity patronages and his ability to have any kind of public profile.

This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain.

But in what is his first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

UK

Everything we know about Prince Andrew’s titles decision

Published

5 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Everything we know about Prince Andrew's titles decision

Prince Andrew has announced he is giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York.

The decision is understood to have been made in close consultation with King Charles and other members of the Royal Family.

Prince Andrew said continued accusations against him were distracting from the King’s work.

He had been accused by Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, of sexual assault. He denies this.

Which titles is he giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title. Sky News understands this will be immediate.

He will also give up his knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and his Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.

He will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.

Prince Andrew will also remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

Why is this happening now?

Ms Giuffre, who was one of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, alleged Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, and sued him in 2021.

In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, due to be published on Tuesday, she alleged he was “entitled” and “believed having sex with me was his birthright”.

Prince Andrew has always denied the allegations.

He has also always claimed that a well-known image of them together was doctored. Before her death, which her family said was by suicide, the case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Ms Giuffre’s posthumous memoir goes on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”.

The email was reportedly sent three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

It is understood that the changes will take effect immediately.

The Giuffre family has called for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

Prince Andrew’s decision to relinquish his titles also comes following increased pressure over his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

Will this affect his ex-wife and daughters?

Sky News understands that Andrew will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge. His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also remain living at the Royal Lodge.

But for the second year running, he will not attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, it is understood.

Andrew’s ex-wife will also no longer use her Duchess of York title.

She was dropped by numerous charities last month after it emerged that she wrote to convicted sex offender Epstein, calling him a “supreme friend”, despite publicly disowning him in the media.

The decision over Andrew’s titles will not impact on the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills says the move may not stop the influx of negative stories about him.

She said: “This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

“Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain. But in what is the prince’s first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying, ‘I vigorously deny the accusations against me’.”

What did Prince Andrew say in his statement?

In his statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”