Connect with us

Published

on

Since last year’s general election, Sir Mel Stride has become a familiar face for those of us who like our politics.

During the campaign, he regularly found himself on breakfast TV and radio. So much so, Sir Mel was referred to as the “minister for the morning round” by some of our industry colleagues.

By our count, he was on Sky News Breakfast at least 10 times during the campaign’s 43 days.

👉 Tap here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts 👈

Following the election, and losing the Conservative leadership race to Kemi Badenoch, Sir Mel now puts questions to Rachel Reeves as shadow chancellor.

Still seen as a safe pair of hands, Sir Mel’s penchant for doing the “morning round” hasn’t slowed down either, making regular appearances on breakfast TV and radio.

More on Conservatives

Luckily, he found some time between all that to sit down for an interview with Sky’s Beth Rigby for the Electoral Dysfunction podcast. He spoke about his transition to Opposition, taking on Reform, and the most controversial topic in Westminster – lunch.

Here’s what we learned:

1. Opposition isn’t ‘awful’ – but it is like ‘warfare’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘I think people will see through Reform’s populism’

Before the election, Sir Mel served as work and pensions secretary. Shifting to the Opposition was not “awful”, despite losing the muscle of the civil service.

“But it is like guerrilla warfare,” he said.

“You suddenly lose all the trappings of government. Somebody once said to me, ‘when you get in the back of a car and you sit down and it doesn’t go anywhere, that’s when you realise you’re no longer a minister’.

“So it is that sort of sense of being looked after that disappears.”

There’s also a smaller team of Conservatives in the Commons. Before the election, Rishi Sunak had 343 MPs behind him.

Ms Badenoch currently only has 119.

“When you’re down to 120 MPs – and some set piece events, there might be only a fraction of those people there – it’s much quieter.

“What I actually often do is I can be quite provocative of the Opposition to get them going, because then at least you get something to feed off. Sometimes I do that to, just get the energy in the chamber.”

2. Being at the despatch box on big days can be ‘tricky’ – but he has a ‘secret’

You may remember Sir Mel’s lively response to Rachel Reeves’s spring statement in March. He revealed that, on those big political days, he isn’t told what the chancellor will say until about half an hour before it’s said in the Commons.

“It does give you and your team literally 10 or 15 minutes to… work out what the main things are,” he said.

However, he tells Electoral Dysfunction that you do have to be able to think on your feet in that scenario.

He said: “You are thinking about ‘what are the attack lines I’m going to use?’… and amend what you’re going to do.”

He added that he doesn’t get nervous. That might have to do with Sir Mel having been president of the Oxford Union debating society “many, many years ago”.

“Now the secret’s out. The secret is out Beth, and you’re the first to have gleaned that secret from me,” he said.

To be fair, it is on his website.

3. He’s not a huge fan of Reform

Nigel Farage
Image:
Nigel Farage

As the Conservatives battle with Reform for the right, Sir Mel didn’t have many positive words for Nigel Farage’s party.

“With Reform… these are populists, who peddle fantasy economics,” he said.

“‘Take everybody out of income tax up to £20,000 costs about £80bn according to the IFS [Institute For Fiscal Studies].”

The IFS has said it needed “more detail” to exactly cost Reform’s proposal, but “it could easily be in the range of £50 to £80bn a year”.

“I think ultimately,” Sir Mel says, “people will see through a lot of the populism that Reform stands for.”

He added that he believed that Reform’s 2024 manifesto, was, economically, “a work of fiction”.

“I mean, it’s quite dangerous, actually. I think if they’d been elected… the economy would have gone into a very bad place,” he said.

4. His ideal lunch? A cheese and ham toastie

Ms Badenoch and Sir Mel see eye-to-eye on many things - lunch isn't one of them. Pic: PA
Image:
Ms Badenoch and Sir Mel see eye-to-eye on many things – lunch isn’t one of them. Pic: PA

Sir Mel also addressed the most pressing issue of all – lunch.

If you’re unaware, this has proven a controversial subject in Westminster. Ms Badenoch told The Spectator in December she was “not a sandwich person… lunch is for wimps”.

Ms Reeves then told Electoral Dysfunction in March that she whips up a cheddar sandwich in 11 Downing Street when she can.

Read more from Sky News:
Labour MP hits out at ‘farce’ anti-corruption trial in Bangladesh
Lammy refers himself to watchdog after fishing with JD Vance

Sir Mel falls more in line with his opposite number than his leader.

“I’ve always liked a sandwich, particularly a toasted sandwich,” he said.

“I’d go with the Cadillac, the Rolls Royce of sandwiches, a ham and cheese.”

Sir Mel has previously, however, been partial to some more peculiar fillings.

“Do you remember those Breville toastie makers? When I went to university, I had one of those, or whatever the equivalent was,” he said.

“You could put baked beans in, eggs in, and all sorts of things.

“It was fantastic.”

To each, their own.

Electoral Dysfunction unites political powerhouses Beth Rigby, Ruth Davidson, and Harriet Harman to cut through the spin, and explain to you what’s really going on in Westminster and beyond.

Want to leave a question for Beth, Ruth, and Harriet?

Email: electoraldysfunction@sky.uk

WhatsApp: 07934 200444

Continue Reading

Politics

Cryptojacker gets 1 year prison after admitting to $3.5M fraud

Published

on

By

Cryptojacker gets 1 year prison after admitting to .5M fraud

Cryptojacker gets 1 year prison after admitting to .5M fraud

Charles O. Parks III, who admitted to misusing $3.5 million worth of resources from two cloud computing providers to mine crypto, was sentenced to one year and one day in prison.

Continue Reading

Politics

How a chaotic 24 hours unfolded ahead of Trump and Zelenskyy’s crunch White House talks

Published

on

By

How a chaotic 24 hours unfolded ahead of Trump and Zelenskyy's crunch White House talks

If there’s one thing the past 24 hours has confirmed, it’s that it’s still Donald Trump’s world, and we’re all just living in it.

In the aftermath of the Alaska meeting, the US president’s deal-making skills came under question when he seemingly walked away empty-handed.

But it was clear he had retained his ability to catch everyone off guard, as a meeting between him and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy unexpectedly became a last-minute White House peace summit.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ukraine faces biggest challenge yet ahead of White House talks

The invitation to European leaders drifted out, and within hours, the cast list had grown to include six more, as world leaders dropped everything to fit in with Mr Trump’s unpredictable timetable.

There were signs of disorganisation behind the scenes.

When the British Prime Minister’s spokesman was asked who the invite had come from – the White House or the Ukrainian president – they replied: “A bit of both.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What happened when Zelenskyy last went to White House

Read more:
The land Ukraine could be told to give up
Key takeaways from Alaska summit

Meanwhile, the meeting of the coalition of the willing – a Starmer and Macron-led group of Ukraine’s European allies – had a nervous feel to it as members resolved to stand firm with Ukraine – even if it puts them at odds with the US.

At times, it sounded like they were trying to convince themselves they could do it.

And as all of this frantic diplomatic reaction played out, the man in the middle of it all headed to the golf course – calm at the centre of the diplomatic storm he created as his allies swirl around him.

Continue Reading

Politics

Sir Keir Starmer and his allies have no choice but to keep their Trump criticisms implicit

Published

on

By

Sir Keir Starmer and his allies have no choice but to keep their Trump criticisms implicit

Sir Keir Starmer is straining his diplomatic sinews to simultaneously praise Donald Trump’s efforts to end the war in Ukraine, while repeating calls for a completely different approach – one which ends the cosy bonhomie with Vladimir Putin, threatens the Russians with sanctions, and puts the Ukrainians back centre stage.

If that’s a message which feels like quite a stretch in writing, in person, during this morning’s call of international leaders, it must have been even more awkward.

Major shift as Trump backs peace deal over ceasefire; follow latest

Donald Trump‘s public dismissal of the Europeans’ previous calls for a ceasefire – after his tete-a-tete with Putin – has only highlighted divisions.

Of course, the prime minister and his European allies have no choice but to keep their criticism of the Alaskan summit implicit, not explicit.

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin after their private meeting in Alaska. Pic: Reuters/ Kevin Lamarque
Image:
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin after their private meeting in Alaska. Pic: Reuters/ Kevin Lamarque

Even as they attempt to ramp up their own military preparedness to help reinforce any future peace deal, they need President Trump to lead the way in trying to force President Putin to the negotiating table – and to back up any agreement with the threat of American firepower.

For Downing Street, President Trump’s new willingness to contribute to any future security guarantee is a significant step, which Starmer claims “will be crucial in deterring Putin from coming back for more”.

It’s a commitment the prime minister has been campaigning for for months, a caveat to all the grand plans drawn up by the so-called Coalition of the Willing.

While the details are still clearly very much to be confirmed, whatever comments made by Donald Trump about his openness to help police any peace in Ukraine have been loudly welcomed by all those present, a glimmer of progress from the diplomatic mess in Anchorage.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump-Putin meeting: Key takeaways

Read more
Analysis: Trump is the real loser
Analysis: Indicted war criminal treated like a king
Key takeaways from the Alaska summit

Of course, the promise of security guarantees only means anything if a peace deal is actually reached.

At the moment, as the European leaders’ bluntly put it in repeating Donald Trump’s words back to him: “There’s no deal until there’s a deal.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Wallace: Putin ‘laughing all the way home’

Fears of Zelenskyy being painted as warmonger

There is clearly real concern in European capitals following the US president’s comments that the onus is now on Volodymyr Zelenskyy to ‘do a deal’, that the Ukrainians will come under growing pressure to make concessions to the Russians.

As former defence secretary Ben Wallace said: “Given that Donald Trump has failed to deliver a deal, his track record would show that Donald Trump then usually tries to seek to blame someone else. I’m worried that next week it could be President Zelenskyy who he will seek to blame.

“He’ll paint him as the warmonger, when in fact everybody knows it’s President Putin.”

The European leaders’ robust statements describing the “killing in Ukraine” and Russia’s “barbaric assault” are an attempt to try to counter that narrative, resetting the international response to Putin following the warmth of his welcome by President Trump – friendlier by far than that afforded to many of them, and infinitely more than the barracking President Zelenskyy received.

They’ll all be hoping to avoid a repeat of that on Monday.

Continue Reading

Trending