Double-dealing, plotting, declarations of loyalty and treachery – in recent weeks the nation has feasted on Celebrity Traitors.
But these sorts of antics emanating from Downing Street, a couple of weeks out from a critical budget, feels far less entertaining and only serves to further hurt a struggling prime minister.
It wasn’t the intention. Allies of Keir Starmer have been alive to growing talk of a possible post-budget challenge, which has building amid growing concerns from MPs about the upcoming manifesto-breaking budget, the continued dire polling, and a Downing Street forever on the back foot.
There was a decision, as I understand it, from the PM’s team, in light of questions being asked about a possible challenge, to put it out there that he would stay and fight a leadership challenge should it come.
I was briefed about this on Tuesday by allies that wanted to make the case to the parliamentary party about the perils of trying to oust a sitting prime minister 18 months into the parliamentary term.
My contacts made it very clear to me that the PM would fight any challenge, in turn triggering a three-month leadership battle that would spook the markets, create more chaos and further damage the Labour brand.
More on Budget
Related Topics:
They also stressed the PM has no intention of giving way just 18 months in. The intention was to try to see off any plot and scare the parliamentary party into line at the prospect of a full-on meltdown should the challenge come.
But the decision by some of the PM’s allies to anonymously also drop the name of prime traitor suspect – Wes Streeting – into briefings has badly backfired and plunged No 10 into crisis.
‘Frustration’ after PM’s allies went ‘too far’
As for the clean-up job, Mr Streeting – already carded for the morning round ahead of a speech on the NHS on Wednesday – has come out to declare his loyalty (tick), but also take aim at the No 10 briefers, and called on the PM to take them to task.
On the part of No 10, I was told by sources on Wednesday morning that there wasn’t an attempt to brief against the health secretary – there is a view that some of Sir Keir’s allies might have gone too far, rather to make it clear the PM was prepared to fight a challenge if it came.
I am told by one No 10 source there is “frustration” over how his played out and it had “got out of control”.
“Wes is doing a good job, is an asset and doing a big speech today making the broader case of not cutting spending ahead of the budget,” said a source.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:57
Health Secretary Wes Streeting denies claims he is having talks about ousting the PM and says such accusations are ‘self-defeating’ and don’t ‘help anyone’.
But putting the genie back in the bottle is no easy feat. MPs are furious at the briefings and exasperated that No 10 have made a mountain out of a molehill, with some suggesting that there wasn’t an active plot post-budget, and they have created a crisis when there wasn’t one.
“They’ve done this before,” observed on senior party figure. “They pick a fight of their own making and imply everything is a calamity ahead of a big possible negative, be it the budget or the Batley and Spen by-election [in an effort to get MPs to rally around the PM].
“It’s worked in the past; I think they have misplayed it this time. They have started a fire they cannot put out.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:55
Sir Keir Starmer backed Wes Streeting at PMQs earlier.
The prime minister has been left badly burnt in all of this. He was forced at PMQs to defend his health secretary and his chief of staff as Kemi Badenoch goaded him over No 10’s “toxic culture”, and called for him to sack Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff.
The PM told his party that he “never authorised” briefings against his cabinet and that it was “completely unacceptable”. But when his team were later asked about what the PM was going to do about it, they didn’t appear to have an answer.
If he takes no action, it will only feed into the sense among many in his party that Sir Keir doesn’t have a grip of his operation and is not leading from the front. That’s difficult when his health secretary, having professed his loyalty, has called on the PM to deal with those briefing against him. It’s a mess.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:33
Sir Keir Starmer was forced to defend his health secretary at PMQs after a series of briefings against him that the PM said were unauthorised.
Budget measures to calm febrile party
And this mess comes at a time that is already so difficult for this government. Number 10 and No 11 knows exactly how difficult the coming weeks are going to be.
The chancellor has been out pitch rolling her budget, trying to explain the reasons behind potential manifesto-breaking pledges and arguing that the alternatives – cutting spending and a return to austerity or breaking fiscal rules, and the knock on effect in the markets – are far worse.
The prime minister is also going to be out making the case as Downing Street and the Treasury work out how they can possibly try to sell a manifesto-breaking budget to voters already completely disillusioned with this Labour administration.
I’m told that the current working plan is to do a combination of tax rises and action on the two-child benefit cap in order for the prime minister to be able to argue that in breaking his manifesto pledges, he is trying his hardest to protect the poorest in society and those working people he has spoken of being endlessly in his mind’s eye when he takes decisions in No 10.
The final decisions are yet to be taken, but the current thinking is to lift the basic rate of income tax – perhaps by 2p – and then simultaneously cut national insurance contributions for those on the basic rate of income tax (those who earn up to £50,000 a year). That way, the chancellor can raise several billion in tax from those with the ‘broadest shoulders’ – higher-rate taxpayers and pensioners or landlords.
At the same time, the chancellor intends to move on the two-child benefit cap – although it’s unclear if that will be a full or partial lifting of that cap – in order to argue that Labour is trying to still protect those on lower incomes from tax hikes.
Those two measures will be designed to try to calm a febrile party and prevent panic after the budget. As one informed MP put it to me, the combination of tax rises for wealthier workers and more support for parents with more than two children are arguments that many MPs could get behind.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
12:36
Will the chancellor cut the two-child benefit cap to save cash when she unveils her budget? Mhairi Aurora looks at the dilemma facing Rachel Reeves.
More bad news at moment of peril
This is also why No 10 getting ahead of a possible post-budget coup has surprised me a little, given that pretty much all the conversations about a possible challenge to the PM have been linked to the ballot box test next May.
One party figure told me on Wednesday it would be “insane and catastrophic” to for the party to try and bring down a Labour PM over a Labour budget, given, for a start, how the markets would react, and thinks the No 10 briefing is a reflection of how “paranoid and out of touch” the Starmer operation is with the parliamentary party.
But it is also true that there is a settled view among some very senior figures in the party that Sir Keir lacks the charisma, leadership and communication skills to take on Nigel Farage, while broken manifesto promises will kill his hopes of standing for a second term. As one figure put it to me: “Breaking those promises will destroy him. The public won’t give him a hearing again. We need a clean skin.”
The whispered plots around Westminster are now front page news – not something the Sir Keir would have wanted as he prepares to front up what is shaping up to be his biggest test as prime minister yet, should he break the most sacred of his manifesto pledges on not raising VAT, income tax and national insurance on working people.
There is no doubt the budget will be a moment of peril – and those who wanted to be faithful to the PM this week have somehow only managed to make his situation even worse.
The longest US government shutdown on record is finally set to conclude, with the House of Representatives voting through a contested funding bill on Wednesday.
The bill is now headed to US President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it Wednesday night.
Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers staunchly debated the bill in the House of Representatives, ahead of a final vote that ultimately ended in favor of the bill, with 222 votes in favor and 209 against.
House of Representatives debating the bill on Wednesday. Source: Bloomberg
According to a statement obtained by Fox News Digital, US President Donald Trump has already indicated that he will sign the bill, which would officially end the shutdown. The BBC reports that Trump plans to sign the bill at 9:45 pm local time during a private dinner with business leaders.
“The Administration urges every Member of Congress to support this responsible, good faith product to finally put an end to the longest shutdown in history,” the statement read.
The funding bill would cover most of the government’s expenses through to the end of January next year.
The bill saw neither side of the political aisle willing to budge. Democrats were pushing to halt the bill, demanding more funding for healthcare and the cost-of-living crisis. Republicans were not willing to address these concerns in the bill, instead calling for the government to reopen and promising to address these issues afterward.
The government shutdown has halted the progress of crypto bills and also left a significant number of spot-crypto exchange-traded fund applications sitting on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s desk.
Meanwhile, other bills — such as the comprehensive market structure bill — that have made some progress even during the shutdown, will now be able to gain more traction.
Bitwise chief investment officer Matt Hougan is more confident that crypto markets will boom in 2026, particularly as there hasn’t been a late-2025 rally yet.
Speaking to Cointelegraph at The Bridge conference in New York City on Wednesday, Hougan said a crypto market rally at the end of 2025 would have fit the four-year cycle thesis, meaning 2026 would mark the start of a bear market, similar to 2022 and 2018.
When asked to revise his prediction about whether the crypto market will boom in 2026, Hougan said: “I’m actually more confident in that quote. The biggest risk was [if] we ripped into the end of 2025 and then we got a pullback.”
Hougan said interest in the Bitcoin (BTC) debasement trade, stablecoins and tokenization would continue to accelerate, while arguing that Uniswap’s fee switch proposal introduced on Monday would reinvigorate interest in decentralized finance protocols in the coming year.
“I think the underlying fundamentals are just so sound,” Hougan said. “I think these earlier forces, institutional investment, regulatory progress, stablecoins, tokenization, I just think those are too big to keep down. So I think 2026 will be a good year.”
Matt Hougan at The Bridge conference in New York City. Source: Cointelegraph
Bitcoin can still set a new high before year’s end
Hougan is still optimistic that Bitcoin, Ether (ETH) and Solana (SOL) can set new highs by 2026, but not as far as Maelstrom Fund chief investment officer Arthur Hayes and Fundstrat managing partner Tom Lee think.
The pair predicted a few months ago that Bitcoin and Ether could reach $250,000 and $15,000, respectively, before the end of the year.
Bitcoin is currently trading at $101,762 and Ether at $3,416, meaning that they would have to rise 145% and 340% to reach those lofty targets.
Crypto-native retail is “depressed”
Speaking of the current market pullback, Hougan blamed it on “crypto-native retail,” arguing that many early investors have “compressed upside” with large sales lately.
And those who expected a repeat of the 2020-2021 bull cycle have been given a harsh reality check, Hougan said.
“Crypto native retail is depressed, they were beaten down by FTX, they were beaten down by the memecoin debacle. They were beaten down by the altcoin season not arriving. They got hurt on the 10/10 liquidation, and I think they’re just sitting this one out.”
On the other hand, “TradFi retail” is thriving, according to Hougan, who pointed to the rise in spot crypto exchange-traded fund inflows over the last two years.
“Traditional retail, like my uncle, he’s moving into crypto, that part of retail is still alive,” said Hougan.
Reform UK has pulled out of a BBC documentary about the party amid a row over the broadcaster’s misleading editing of a Donald Trump speech.
The Rise Of Reform had been due to air in January, fronted by Laura Kuenssberg, and was being made by the independent production company October Films.
An internal memo sent to all Reform MPs, councillors and other senior figures, and seen by Sky News, told party officials to stop assisting with the documentary.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:01
Trump: I have ‘obligation’ to sue BBC
A senior official wrote: “Hi all, as you will be aware October Films have been filming a documentary with Kuenssberg on the rise of Reform.
“As part of this, they have been visiting and filming at Reform councils and speaking to our councillors and council leaders across the country.
“We want to be clear that October Films have always conducted themselves professionally, and there is no suggestion from our side that they would maliciously misrepresent Reform UK. However, following the Panorama documentary the trust has been lost.”
The email continued: “If you are approached to participate, we would strongly advise you decline. If you have already participated, we would strongly advise that you contact October Films and explicitly withdraw consent for your footage to be used.”
More on Bbc
Related Topics:
Image: Pic: AP
Production company ‘shocked’ over misleading edit
Meanwhile, a source close to October Films told Sky News the company was “shocked” it wasn’t told about concerns over the Panorama Trump documentary, despite an internal review at the corporation highlighting the misleading edit back in January.
October Films worked on the one-hour Panorama special, Trump: A Second Chance with a majority in-house BBC team, which included a BBC director, executive producer, editor and lawyer.
The source told Sky News: “October Films were not informed there was any question of integrity with the edit. Had they been given the opportunity, they would have insisted on the edit being changed.”
October Films – who are an Emmy and BAFTA-winning independent producer, with credits including BBC2’s Laura Kuenssberg: State of Chaos, Channel 4’s Levison Wood: Walking With…, and CNN’s First Ladies – are understood to have first learned of the misleading edit when a leaked BBC memo was published in The Telegraph.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:03
The Reform UK leader says he has spoken to the US president about the BBC and Donald Trump’s words are ‘not quotable’.
Sky News understands the concealed cut in the president’s speech was present in the first version of the film shown to executive producers at an early viewing, with those producers not told an edit had been made.
Despite subsequent internal viewings, and various changes and tweaks to other parts of the film ahead of sign-off by senior editorial figures, as well as the BBC’s compliance and legal teams, the clip containing the president’s spliced quotes remained intact as part of the final edit.
Sky News approached the BBC for comment and were told they had “nothing to add to the BBC Chair’s letter to CMS committee”.
In his letter, Samir Shah described the edit as an “error of judgement” and admitted it “did give the impression of a direct call for violent action”.
October Films declined to comment.
Image: Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC interviewing David Gauke, then justice minister, in 2019. Pic: Reuters
Where was the documentary shown?
The 57-minute Panorama special – Trump: A Second Chance? – first aired on BBC One on 28 October 2024, a week before the US election.
The documentary aired in the UK and was put on iPlayer.
A shorter international version was cut, but the Capitol speech moment was not included in that cut-down version.
The film never aired in the US and couldn’t be viewed in the US on iPlayer as the content was geoblocked.
Image: The January 6 riot at the Capitol Building. Pic: Getty
What was the misleading edit?
While the BBC say the film received “no significant audience feedback” at the time, the corporation says it has since received over 500 complaints after an internal memo detailing investigations into impartiality was leaked to The Telegraph.
The most contentious issue raised in the memo was the cutting together two parts of a long Trump speech, which he had made on 6 January 2021.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, 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 Spotify 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 Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
This was the day of the storming of the Capitol building in Washington by Trump supporters who believed the 2020 election had been stolen by Joe Biden.
In the documentary, the clip was presented as one sentence, in which Mr Trump appeared to say: “We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you and we fight. We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not gonna have a country anymore.”
In reality Mr Trump’s words, “We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you,” came around 50 minutes before he said, “and we fight. We fight like hell….” The cut had been covered by crowd shots.
Image: The concerns about the Trump documentary edit first came to light in a leaked memo from Michael Prescott, a former journalist
When were issues over the cut first raised?
The author of the leaked memo, Michael Prescott, former adviser to the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and Standards Board (EGSB), says he first raised concerns over impartiality after watching the documentary when it aired on the BBC.
He says his complaint led to an investigation by senior EGSC advisor David Grossman, with a report delivered in January 2025. He said this report raised the alarm over the edit of Mr Trump’s Capitol Hill speech.
Mr Prescott said that following the review BBC executives “refused to accept there had been a breach of standards and doubled down on its defence of Panorama”.
He says he was told at an EGSC meeting in May 2025 that it was “normal practice to edit speeches into short form clips”.
It was after this meeting in May that Mr Prescott says he wrote to the BBC chairman, Samir Shah, asking him to “take some form of action,” but “received no reply”.
Image: Donald Trump is pictured addressing supporters on January 6, 2021. Pic: AP
What’s the fallout been and what’s next?
The misleading edit has already led to the departure of BBC director-general, Tim Davie, and the head of BBC News, Deborah Turness.
Adding to the BBC’s problems, on Monday, the corporation received a letter from Mr Trump’s lawyers,threatening to sue them for $1bn.
They have been asked to issue a “full and fair retraction” of the documentary, “apologise immediately” and “appropriately compensate” the US president.
The BBC has been given a deadline of 10pm UK time on Friday to respond.