Sir Keir Starmer has provoked outrage from senior Tories and political grandees for removing a portrait of Margaret Thatcher from inside 10 Downing Street.
Just eight weeks after he moved into Number 10, it has been claimed by his biographer that he found the £100,000 painting, commissioned by former Labour premier Gordon Brown, “unsettling”.
But his removal of the portrait has been condemned as “vindictive” and “petty” by Tory MPs and prompted calls for the prime minister to return it to its place inside Downing Street.
Sir Keir‘s apparent snub to Lady Thatcher, prime minister for 11 years from 1979 until 1990, is all the more remarkable because just months before the general election he lavished praise on her in a newspaper article.
In comments furiously attacked by trade union leaders and left-wing Labour MPs at the time, Sir Keir praised her for bringing about “meaningful change” in British politics.
“Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism,” he wrote in The Sunday Telegraph last December.
Image: Former prime minister Margaret Thatcher. Pic: PA
Sir Keir’s removal of the painting was revealed by Tom Baldwin, a senior adviser to Ed Miliband when he was Labour leader and author of insightful and acclaimed biography of Sir Keir.
The painting was commissioned by Mr Brown after Lady Thatcher visited him at Number 10 when he was prime minister.
It was funded by an anonymous £100,000 donation and unveiled in 2009.
Advertisement
Speaking at a book festival in Glasgow, Mr Baldwin said Sir Keir told him the portrait had been hung in a study in Downing Street unofficially called the “Thatcher Room”.
‘We don’t comment on the interior’
In a conversation first reported by Glasgow’s Herald newspaper, Mr Baldwin said Sir Keir told him the study was “place where we can go and have a quiet talk”.
He told his audience: “We sat there, and I go: ‘It’s a bit unsettling with her staring down at you like that, isn’t it?'”
He said the prime minister issued a one-word response: “Yeah.”
Mr Baldwin said he then asked if Sir Keir would “get rid of” the portrait, prompting a nod from Starmer. He then added: “And he has.”
Asked about the claims by Mr Baldwin about the removal of the portrait, a Downing Street spokesperson told Sky News: “We don’t comment on the interior of the house.”
But the widespread reporting of the painting’s removal has quickly triggered a furious row, with senior opposition politicians angrily denouncing the prime minister.
Leading the onslaught, former Northern Ireland first minister Baroness Arlene Foster, wrote on X: “I think it is ‘unsettling’ that the PM should remove the first female PM from No 10.
“He cannot deny her role in our nation – the most significant PM after Churchill. Not a good start from Labour, looks and feels vindictive and petty.”
‘Petty approach’
Former Tory minister Esther McVey told the Daily Express: “What a pathetic, petty-minded little man Keir Starmer is – removing a picture of the first female prime minister and one of the longest-serving prime ministers.
“Maybe he doesn’t want to be reminded of a towering politician he could never live up to.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
In Scotland, the three candidates for the leadership of the Scottish Conservative Party all attacked Mr Baldwin’s claims.
Russell Findlay said: “Gordon Brown commissioned this portrait after calling the first female prime minister ‘a conviction politician who saw the need for change’.
“I agree with Gordon Brown’s reasonable position to treat his political opponents with decency and respect… Keir Starmer seems to have a much more petty approach.”
Rival leadership candidate Meghan Gallacher said: “It’s disgraceful that Keir Starmer would remove a picture of Britain’s first female prime minister…
“Regardless of your opinions on Margaret Thatcher, she paved the way for women in politics and tackled sexist stereotypes head-on.
“She’s an inspiration for many, a defining figure in British politics and she deserves to be recognised for her many achievements… Her legacy should be honoured – the portrait should be returned.”
‘Thatcher brutalised miners’
Sir Keir’s praise for Lady Thatcher in his Sunday Telegraph article in December led to furious complaints from critics of the Labour leader on the left of the party.
Fire Brigades Union general secretary Matt Wrack said: “Her government deliberately inflicted mass unemployment and poverty on communities through a vindictive pit closures programme and the decimation of the manufacturing industry.
“Working people and entire regions of Britain are still living with the dire consequences of Thatcherism to this day.”
And left-wing Labour MP Ian Lavery, a former National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) president and a leading ally of Jeremy Corbyn, said: “My constituents do not in any way share this view. Thatcher brutalised the miners and their families.”
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
More on China
Related Topics:
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
Image: These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
Image: The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Image: Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:08
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.
The UK is in talks with Brazil over the “potential sale” of the Royal Navy’s two amphibious assault ships that are being ditched to cut costs, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
Defence experts said the fact HMS Bulwark – which has only just received an expensive refit – and HMS Albion are being flogged off underlines the pressure on the defence budget even though Sir Keir Starmer keeps talking up his promises to boost expenditure.
The two warships can be used to deploy Royal Marines to shore – a vital capability at a time of growing global threats.
News of the possible sale was first revealed in Latin American media.
One report said the Royal Navy and Brazilian Navy had signed an agreement that would see the UK giving information to the Brazilians on the state of the two ships prior to any purchase.
Asked about the claim that the UK would sell the assault ships to Brazil, a Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “We can confirm we have entered discussions with the Brazilian Navy over the potential sale of HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion.
“As announced in November, both ships are being decommissioned from the Royal Navy. Neither were planned to go back to sea before their out of service dates in the 2030s.”
More on Brazil
Related Topics:
James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, appeared to question the wisdom of the move.
“At Defence orals [House of Commons questions] on January 6th Defence Secretary John Healey said: ‘HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion were not genuine capabilities’,” Mr Cartlidge wrote in a post on social media.
“They’ve just been sold to Brazil.”
Matthew Savill, the director of military science at the Royal United Services Institute, said the plan to sell the vessels demonstrates there “is still life in both these ships”.
He said: “The fact that the UK is prepared to sell off useful amphibious capability – which could be used in evacuation operations or other cases where air transport is difficult – shows just how tight finances are even with the promised budget increase.
“The replacements for these ships are still several years away and won’t be available until the 2030s.”
Mr Savill added: “As an aside, Brazil will probably have greater amphibious capacity than the UK, having previously bought HMS Ocean, the UK’s helicopter assault ship.”
HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark entered service two decades ago.
Both are currently held at lower readiness having not been to sea since 2023 and 2017 respectively.
HMS Ocean, a helicopter-landing vessel and once the largest warship in the Royal Navy, was sold to the Brazilian Navy in 2018 after 20 years in service.