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.
Advertisement
Image: Rishi Sunak responds to Sir Keir Starmer during PMQs
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.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer during PMQs
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.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:10
Starmer pushes PM on childcare
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”.
Image: Labour published an attack advert on social media targeting Rishi Sunak last year. Pic: Labour/X
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”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:24
‘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.
Image: Labour’s attack advert targeting Sunak was published on the Conservative Home website earlier this year. Pic: Conservative Home
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.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
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.
Image: The Conservative Party’s poster campaign attacking Gordon Brown during the 2010 election. Pic: PA
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.
Image: The Conservative Central Office’s 1996 poster depicting Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Pic: Conservative Central Office
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.
Decades of abuse of thousands of young men by staff at a detention centre in County Durham was “ignored and dismissed” by the prison service, the police and the Home Office, an investigation has found.
Warning: Readers may find the content below distressing
The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO) has issued a report into how “horrific” physical and sexual violence was allowed to continue against 17 to 21-year-olds at the Medomsley Detention Centre in Consett.
It named officer Neville Husband who was thought to have groomed and attacked hundreds of trainees in Medomsley’s kitchens. He was described by the ombudsman “as possibly the most prolific sex offender in British history”.
Image: Neville Husband in December 1983. File pic: NCJ Archive/Mirrorpix/Getty
The abuse at Medomsley continued “unchallenged” for the entire 26 years of its operation, from 1961 to 1987, according to the report from ombudsman Adrian Usher. There was, he said, “extreme violence and acts of a sadistic nature”.
The centre held inmates who were all first-time offenders and who had been convicted of crimes ranging from shoplifting and non-payment of fines to robbery.
More on County Durham
Related Topics:
Image: A sign for the centre in July 1998. Pic: Elliot Michael/Mirrorpix/Getty
Several members of staff were convicted after investigations by Durham Constabulary in 2001 and 2023 found widespread abuse of more than 2,000 detainees at Medomsley.
But the ombudsman investigated what authorities knew about the abuse, whether there were opportunities to have intervened at the time and what was done about any opportunities.
Husband ‘used power with devastating effect’
Husband was finally convicted of sexual assault and was jailed in 2003 and again in 2005. He died in 2010.
Mr Usher said: “The illegitimate power imbalance that existed between Husband and the trainees and other staff further flourished within a culture of collusion and silence from other employees.
“Husband used this power with devastating effect.”
Image: Then home secretary Leon Brittan visiting in 1985. Pic: Geoff Hewitt/Mirrorpix/Getty
Trainees ‘physically abused’
Trainees were physically abused from the moment they arrived, when they bathed, were strip searched, during physical education, while working and even during medical examinations, the PPO found.
Victims were targeted for being perceived as gay or weak. Inmates who failed to address staff as “sir” would be punched.
Witnesses said baths were either scalding hot or freezing cold. A number of them said if they were ill, painkillers could be taped to their forehead and they would be told to run around until the pill had dissolved.
Image: Ombudsman Adrian Usher (left) and senior investigator Richard Tucker
Medomsley leaders at every level ‘failed’
Mr Usher said: “Leaders at every level at Medomsley, including the warden, failed in their duty to protect the best interests of those under their charge. Either staff in leadership roles were aware of the abuse, in which case they were complicit, or they lacked dedication and professional curiosity to such an extent as to not be professionally competent.”
“The knowledge of abuse by the Prison Service, the police, the Home Office and other organisations of authority was ignored and dismissed. The authorities failed in their duty to keep detainees safe,” Mr Usher added.
The report highlights a complaint, written in 1965, of an officer striking an inmate with “a distinct blow”. The handwritten response below dismisses it as “playfulness”.
Staff ‘took law into own hands’
A letter sent to all detention centre wardens in 1967 refers to the “increasing number of complaints of assault” and warns of staff “taking the law into their own hands” with discipline going “beyond the legitimate”.
The police officers who delivered 17-year-old Eric Sampson to Medomsley in December 1977 told him he was going to “get the hell kicked out” of him there, he said.
Image: Eric Sampson called the centre ‘hell on earth’
Victim – ‘I could have been killed’
“The violence I had done to me was terrible. I could have been killed in there,” said Mr Sampson. “Every day and night was hell on earth for the full nine weeks.
“With all the abuse, and obviously the sexual abuse, it totally ruined my life. It should never have happened in the first place, or it should have been stopped.”
The inquiry spoke to 79 victims and witnesses.
Over 2,000 former inmates came forward to give their testimony to Operation Seabrook, a police investigation that led to five retired officers being convicted of abuse in 2019.
Lawyer David Greenwood, who represents victims of the abuse at Medomsley, said he has been contacted by men who were held at 20 other detention centres around the country, alleging similar violence.
“I think it was a systematic thing. These prison officers were cogs in a big machine which was designed, culturally or by training, to treat boys really badly,” he said.
Image: Lawyer David Greenwood suggested abuse may have been widespread
Mr Greenwood is calling for a wider inquiry into abuse at all of the detention centres.
What have the police said?
The ombudsman’s report found police officers from both Durham and Cleveland police were “aware that physical and sexual abuse was taking place at Medomsley from as early as 1965 due to complaints of abuse made at police stations”.
It said officers who ignored, dismissed or took no action “failed in their duty to report and investigate crime”.
In response to the report, Durham Constabulary has publicly apologised for “the force’s historic failure to investigate decades of horrifying abuse”.
Chief Constable Rachel Bacon said: “This report makes for extremely difficult reading. It exposes shameful failings by police at that time: both to recognise that the physical violence meted out by staff at Medomsley amounted to abuse or to adequately investigate allegations by those victims who did have the bravery to come forward and report what happened to them.
“I am satisfied that policing standards at Durham Constabulary are worlds apart from those which sadly appear to have existed at that time.”
Cleveland Police said in a statement: “All victims of any form of abuse or exploitation should always be listened to and action taken to prevent any further forms of abuse, and we acknowledge this was not the case many decades ago.
“We know cases like this have a lasting impact upon victims and Cleveland Police has, and continues to, improve its service and support to all those affected by abuse, especially those in cases of children and young people.”
The ombudsman’s report pointed out that the victims have never received a public apology and the complaints process for children in custody remains the same today as it was at the time of the abuse.
Mr Usher said: “I leave it to all of the bodies in this investigation to examine their organisational consciences and determine if there is any action taken today, despite such an extended passage of time, that would diminish, even fractionally, the trauma that is still being felt by victims to this day.”
Seven men have been charged with more than 40 offences against 11 teenagers after an investigation into child sexual exploitation in Bristol.
The alleged offences took place between 2022 and 2025 when the victims were in their mid to late teens.
Police said an investigation into claims of group-based sexual abuse in the city began in late 2023.
The men were arrested in April 2024 and bailed, but were detained again yesterday and are due to appear at Bristol Magistrates’ Court this morning.
The seven charged are:
Mohamed Arafe, 19, (Syrian): Six child sexual exploitation charges and one count of sexual assault. He also faces two counts over the supply of cocaine and ecstasy.
Sina Omari, 20, (Iranian): Two counts of rape; five child sexual exploitation charges; two counts of making an indecent photo of a child; two counts over the supply of cocaine and ecstasy.
Wadie Sharaf, 21, (Syrian): One count of rape; one count of attempted rape; three counts of sexual assault; one count of sexual activity with a child.
Hussain Bashar, 19, (British): One count of rape.
Mohammed Kurdi, 21 (British): Two counts of rape; two child sexual exploitation charges; two counts over the supply of ecstasy and cannabis.
Unnamed 19-year-old man: Four counts of rape; one child sexual exploitation charge; one count of distributing an indecent photo of a child, two counts over the supply of cocaine and ecstasy.
Unnamed 26-year-old-man: Two counts of rape and one count of sexual assault.
All five men named by police are from Bristol. Police also released details of their nationalities, along with their names and ages.
Officers said safeguarding measures and support have been made available to the victims.
Superintendent Deepak Kenth said the case would be a “huge shock to our communities” but they were working “tirelessly” to stop child sexual exploitation in the city.
“We’ve held events in Bristol city centre and continue to work with hotels, taxi drivers, and other businesses, to raise awareness about the signs of exploitation and the need to report any concerns or issues to the police,” he said.
Thousands of job cuts at the NHS will go ahead after the £1bn needed to fund the redundancies was approved by the Treasury.
The government had already announced its intention to slash the headcount across both NHS England and the Department of Health by around 18,000 administrative staff and managers, including on local health boards.
The move is designed to remove “unnecessary bureaucracy” and raise £1bn a year by the end of the parliament to improve services for patients by freeing up more cash for operations.
NHS England, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Treasury had been in talks over how to pay for the £1bn one-off bill for redundancies.
It is understood the Treasury has not granted additional funding for the departures over and above the NHS’s current cash settlement, but the NHS will be permitted to overspend its budget this year to pay for redundancies, recouping the costs further down the line.
‘Every penny will be spent wisely’
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is set to make further announcements regarding the health service in the budget on 26 November.
And addressing the NHS providers’ annual conference in Manchester today, Mr Streeting is expected to say the government will be “protecting investment in the NHS”.
He will add: “I want to reassure taxpayers that every penny they are being asked to pay will be spent wisely.
“Our investment to offer more services at evenings and weekends, arm staff with modern technology, and improving staff retention is working.
“At the same time, cuts to wasteful spending on things like recruitment agencies saw productivity grow by 2.4% in the most recent figures – we are getting better bang for our buck.”
Image: Health Secretary Wes Streeting during a visit to the NHS National Operations Centre in London earlier this year. Pic: PA
He is also expected on Wednesday to give NHS leaders the go-ahead for a 50% cut to headcounts in Integrated Care Boards, which plan health services for specific regions.
They have been tasked with transforming the NHS into a neighbourhood health service – as set down in the government’s long-term plans for the NHS.
Those include abolishing NHS England, which will be brought back into the health department within two years.