Labour Together
On 14th May 2026 Wes Streeting resigned as health secretary. His resignation letter is interesting. He of course talked about the previous week's election results. However, he only refers only to the losses to Reform and to the nationalist parties. "Last week's election results were unprecedented - both in terms of the scale of the defeat and the consequences of that failure. For the first time in our country's history, nationalists are in power in every corner of the United Kingdom - including a dangerous English nationalism represented by Nigel Farage and Reform UK."
It is noticeable that he does not mention those seats lost to the Green Party. The reason for this is that he is attempting to move to the left of Starmer in any election contest. This is highlighted in his comments: "There is no doubt that the unpopularity of this Government was a major and common factor in our defeats across England, Scotland and Wales. Good Labour people lost through no fault of their own. There are many reasons we could point to: from individual mistakes on policy like the decision to cut the winter fuel allowance to the 'island of strangers' speech, all of which have left the country not knowing who we are or what we really stand for." (1)
At the time Streeting did not challenge Keir Starmer for the leadership of the Labour Party. Starmer has said that he will stand if he is nominated. Starmer changed the rules as soon as he was elected to make it more difficult to unseat him when Labour Party members discovered he had lied (his ten socialist pledges) to gain victory. Those who challenge require 20% of the party's MPs to back a replacement candidate. As there are currently 403 Labour MPs, Streeting needs the support of 81 of them to start a contest. Once a Labour leadership election is triggered, other candidates could join the contest if they also have 81 backers. Starmer would not be required to gather support as he would be automatically on the ballot paper if he chose to contest the leadership election. (2)
Wes Streeting is considered to be the main contender because several of his close friends have resigned from government posts. The only reason they have done this is that they have been promised better jobs in a Streeting administration. However, pundits have been surprised why Streeting has taken so long to resign and to challenge for the leadership. Some pundits suggest that he is struggling to get 81 names who are willing to support him. We know that because Streeting's allies are contacting MPs who are not on the right of the party to become one of his supporters. The problem for Streeting is that his 81 supporters include several cabinet members who have promised their support in return for jobs better than they have now. The problem for them if Streeting does not win, their political careers are probably over. (2a)
To understand what is going on one has to explore the way Starmer rose to power. After the defeat of the Labour Party in the 2015 General Election, a group of right-wing members of the party, including Wes Streeting, Peter Mandelson, Morgan McSweeny, Lisa Nandy, Steve Reed, Rachael Reeves, Shabana Mahmood, Bridget Phillipson, Lucy Powell, Chris Curtis, Josh Simons, Tom Rutland, Chuka Umunna, Tristram Hunt and Maurice Glasman, formed a pressure group called Labour Together. (3)
It was funded by two multimillionaires, Martin Taylor and Trevor Chinn. (4) The group was furious when Jeremy Corbin replaced Ed Miliband as leader. This was only possible because Miliband had changed the rules to increase the power of party members to decide who should be leader. Peter Mandelson was quoted as saying in February 2017 that he worked "every single day" to end Corbyn's leadership. (5)
The Times stated that "Labour Together was starting to raise money on a scale and at a speed rarely seen in British politics." (6) Further donations were made in 2018 by several other wealthy businessmen such as Paul Myners (£25,000), Clive Hollick (£10,000), Simon Tuttle (£10,000), Richard Greer ((£10,000) and Sean Wadsworth (£10,000). Labour Together failed at the time to report fully £739,429 of the cash and non-cash donations it received between June 2017 and September 2020 to the electoral commission, as required by law. (7)
However, most of the money came from two individuals. Trevor Chinn is a wealthy entrepreneur with a long history of funding figures on the right of the Labour Party. He has long been associated with Labour Friends of Israel and has an extended history of involvement in pro-Israel causes. Chinn is a member of the executive committee of the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, a pro-Israel lobby group. In November 2024, Chinn was awarded the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honour. The award recognises individuals "who have made an extraordinary contribution to the State of Israel or to humanity through their talents, their service, or in any other way." (8)
Martin Taylor established Nevsky Capital in 2007. Under his management, the Nevsky fund achieved an average annual USD net return of 18.4% for its investors from the period 2000 to 2015, over double the average of other emerging market funds. He initially focused on companies in the former Soviet Bloc, investing in those deemed set to benefit from economic reforms as these economies democratized. His investments include Russian telecom companies such as Vimpelcom and assorted companies in the energy sector, including Gazprom and Lukoil. The fund eventually reached $3.3bn. (9)
Labour Together used this money to poll party members on their policy priorities, splitting members into "instrumentalists" (who would vote for any leader that they thought would win the next election), "idealists" (who projected onto Corbyn what they wanted of him), and "ideologues" (who initially signed up to Labour in the 1970s and 1980s, left or were removed, and then rejoined for Corbyn). The group decided that a successor to Corbyn would need to appeal to all of the "instrumentalists" and over one third of the "idealists", and would need to have served under and backed Corbyn. (10)
Labour Together had a problem as the members of the Labour Party had twice overwhelmingly voted for Jeremy Corbyn. It seemed certain that when Corbyn resigned he would be replaced by another left-wing socialist. The only way that Labour Together could get a right-wing candidate to win the election was to recruit Keir Starmer to pretend he was left-wing by making his ten socialist pledges. (11)
During the campaign campaign, in a television interview, Andrew Neil asked Starmer, "Can you guarantee that under your leadership the 2019 Labour commitments to nationalise water, energy, rail, the Royal Mail - they'll all be in Labour's next election manifesto?" Starmer said yes because "I've made that commitment." Starmer was asked, "Will you remain committed to scrapping university tuition fees, will you remain committed to scrapping them? Starmer replied: "They are pledges, Andrew, so the answer to these questions is yes." (12)
Andrew Neil also questioned the fact that Starmer, unlike his opponents, had not published details of the people or organisations who were funding his campaign. He replied that he would do this later. Jon Trickett, a member of the Socialist Campaign Group pointed out that Starmer's failure to publish donations contemporaneously was "anti-democratic" because "voters deserve to know what lies behind the candidates they are being asked to vote for, before they cast their vote, not afterwards." He added that he feared Starmer was being funded by people who had no desire for socialist measures to be introduced: "I've been campaigning against the influence of money in politics for years. Whether it's in general elections or internal party elections, we need to end the secrecy" (13)
The only way Starmer could become leader was to say he fully supported the policies of Jeremy Corbyn. This enabled him to win by beating Rebecca Long-Bailey (27.6%) and Lisa Nandy (16.2%), with 56.2% of the vote in the first round. Starmer's full donation list was not published until after the election. In total Starmer took £706,135 in donations between January and April 2020. Most of the donors were known to be hostile to the political policies that had been advocated by Starmer. For example, Martin Clarke, a former executive at the roadside recovery firm AA, had long criticised Corbyn and had openly supported the anti-Corbyn breakaway party Change UK in 2019. Other large donors included Waheed Alli (£100,000) and the two founders of Labour Together, the extremely wealthy, Martin Taylor (£95,000) and Trevor Chinn (£50,000). (14)
It was not long before Starmer began dropping his socialist pledges. For example: (i) "Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners, reverse the Tories' cuts in corporation tax and clamp down on tax avoidance, particularly of large corporations. No stepping back from our core principles." (ii) "Abolish Universal Credit and end the Tories' cruel sanctions regime. Stand up for universal services and defend our NHS. Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning." (iii) "Put the Green New Deal at the heart of everything we do. There is no issue more important to our future than the climate emergency. A Clean Air Act to tackle pollution locally. Demand international action on climate rights." (iv) "No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice." (v) "Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system." (vi) "Full voting rights for EU nationals. Defend free movement as we leave the EU. An immigration system based on compassion and dignity. End indefinite detention and call for the closure of centres such as Yarl's Wood." (vii) "Push power, wealth and opportunity away from Whitehall. A federal system to devolve powers – including through regional investment banks and control over regional industrial strategy. Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations." (15)
Starmer did not put his ten socialist measures in the Labour Party Manifesto for the 2024 General Election. When he became prime minister Starmer appointed to his cabinet mainly people that had been funded by the Labour Together group. This included Wes Streeting, Lisa Nandy, Steve Reed, Rachael Reeves, Shabana Mahmood, Bridget Phillipson and Josh Simons. He also sacked his chief of staff Sue Gray and replaced her with Morgan McSweeny. This is the background to why Starmer appointed Peter Mandelson to become ambassador.
On 14 May 2016, Josh Simons, the Labour MP for Makerfield, announced he would stand down, triggering a byelection, so that Andy Burnham could win the seat and then beat Keir Starmer in a leadership contest.. In a letter to constituents announcing his decision to resign, Simons said: "I do not believe this government is delivering the urgent, radical, brave reform we need. We need a new direction. I believe that Andy Burnham can provide it. I could not stand here and tell you that our politics is broken and things need to change, then stand in the way of supporting that change. That means stepping aside as your MP for Makerfield to make way for a leader who has the radicalism, energy and immense courage to meet the moment. A leader who is authentic, honest and trusted, who says what he believes and does what he says." (16)
Why this is a strange decision is that in 2022 Simons became director of Labour Together, which he led until he became a member of parliament. In February 2026 The Times revealed that Labour Together had paid £36,000 to American public relations firm APCO to discredit journalist Gabriel Pogrund by falsely suggesting he might be part of a Russian conspiracy or had relied on emails hacked by the Russian government. It was Simons who organised this smear campaign against journalists who were looking into the funding of Labour Together. APCO was commissioned in January 2024 after a report by The Sunday Times on Labour Together's failure to declare £730,000 of donations between 2017 and 2020. (17) As a result of this article Josh Simons was forced to resign as a Cabinet Office minister. (18)
It has been suggested that offering the seat of Makerfield might be a Labour Together trap. Although it used to be seen as a Labour safe seat, as it has been in the party's hands since its creation in 1983. However, Simons won the seat by a majority of just 5,399 over Reform UK at the 2024 general election. Since then, Labour's polling has collapsed, while Reform's has surged. This month's local elections saw the Reform Party win every council ward in the Makerfield constituency, securing around half the vote. Labour was left trailing behind, having secured little more than a quarter of those who voted. (19)
Is it possible that Labour Together want Burnham to be defeated so that it will make it possible for its candidate, Wes Streeting to become the prime minister. It is clear that Labour Together realised that Starmer was so unpopular that he had to be replaced. Several members of the organisation, Chris Curtis, Joe Morris and Tom Rutland, were some of the first people to call for Starmer to resign. Or maybe, a deal has been done, for example, that Simons, would become Burnham's chief of staff or head of policy. After all, he started off by working for Jeremy Corbyn (he was sacked for leaking information to Labour Together) and so maybe he is willing to work for anyone who has got power. (20)
In the pre-election campaign to become the leader of the Labour Party and the prime minister, Wes Streeting, although closely associated with the conservative policies of Keir Starmer, began adopting left-wing positions that previously he had criticised when in the government. For example, in an interview with Nick Robinson he called for a wealth-tax, similiar to the one proposed by Keir Starmer when he campaigned for the leadership in 2019. Streeting "wealth tax" would work by equalising capital gains tax with income tax. He believed this would raise £12bn a year. The problem for Streeting is that Starmer lied about the introduction of wealth taxes to get elected as party leader. Is Sweeting doing the same thing? Sweeting also has the added problem of being in a government that has constantly ruled out the introduction of such a tax. (21)
Currently, the "soft left" has got a good chance of selecting the next prime minister. There are three Labour pressure groups on the centre-left: Tribune Group, Socialist Campaign Group and Mainstream. Tribune alone has over 100 members. It has seven co-leaders: Beccy Cooper, Debbie Abrahams, Vicky Foxcroft, Louise Haigh, Justin Madders,
Sarah Owen and Yuan Yang. They have argued: "Advocating for the interests of ordinary people is what many of us in the Labour Party became involved in politics to do. And it's the relentless mission of the recently relaunched Tribune Group of Labour MPs, which we are proud to lead. We are fuelled by a mixture of determination that British people be allowed to build a politics and economy that works for them; by intense frustration that this is not the case today; and by hope, that we can and will achieve our mission... It is true that we have a labour market that runs on exploitation, denies workers agency, and funnels wealth to those who contribute the least." (22)
It is not yet known who the Tribune Group will support in any leadership campaign. Given their current policy positions they are unlikely to support Wes Streeting. However, the thing that will prevent Starmer, Sweeting and other Labour Together members of winning the leadership election is the Mandelson case. The House of Commons decided that all documents related to the appointment of Mandelson as ambassador to Washington. The first batch was released on 11 March 2026. It revealed that Keir Starmer was warned by several top officials not to appoint Mandelson. Not only because he was associated with a series of corrupt activities but because of his links to senior figures in China and Russia. (23)
Yet, Mandelson was appointed by Starmer before he had been assessed by the security forces and therefore this decision threatened national security. As Richard Dearlove, the former head of the MI6 (1999-2004) argued: "The role of British ambassador in Washington… sits across a number of highly classified compartments. It is no ordinary diplomatic job. The extensive security acreage of the special relationship includes, for example, the UK's nuclear deterrent, the intelligence relationship, the UK-US alliance which ties together the National Security Agency and GCHQ by treaty, and other domains of great sensitivity. The ambassador has access to these even though their need to become involved in them in normal times is limited. The British staff that comes under the ambassador's authority is extensive and stretches beyond those working in the embassy. The ambassador's access to the US administration is also usually highly privileged, such is the nature of the special relationship." (24)
However, the second batch of the Mandelson/Epstein files are currently with the Intelligence and Security Committee. (ISC). Starmer is pleading with the ISC that the release of the documents would threaten national security. Lord Beamish, the chairman of the ISC, told The Guardian newspaper, it will not be afraid to publish material that is embarrassing to the government. He said there had to be "maximum transparency" about the vetting process Mandelson went through before he was appointed ambassador to the US in December 2024. Paula Barker, the Labour MP for Liverpool Wavertree, added that Starmer had broken every pledge he had made when he stood to become leader of the Labour party and questioned his judgment. Asked how she felt when Starmer confirmed he knew about reports of links between Epstein and Mandelson before his appointment as ambassador, she said: "I was disappointed. I was sickened. And quite frankly, I think the country deserves better." (25)
On 19 May 2026, MPs from both sides of the House of Commons criticised Darren Jones, the prime minister's chief secretary, after he said the government had not disclosed certain information to parliament's intelligence and security committee (ISC). Jones said ministers would now not publish the next tranche of documents on Mandelson until next month, prompting accusations that the government was trying to avoid doing so before the crucial Makerfield byelection, which is expected on 18 June. Neil O'Brien, a shadow Cabinet Office minister, commented: "To say that the government have applied redactions to documents sent to the ISC, beyond the scope agreed by the house, and have also withheld documents entirely from the ISC, is an extremely serious matter that completely undermines what the house agreed. (26)
I have heard from a good source via a member of the committee, that the documents will be released unredacted next week. I am also told that the contents of these documents will force Starmer to resign and will cause problems for Wes Streeting.These documents are unlikely to reveal the real reason why Starmer made this strange appointment of Mandelson as ambassador. Was he being blackmailed into placing a spy in the British Embassy? Is Starmer an agent of China or Israel? Was the Epstein set-up a Mossad, CIA, FBI or MI6 honeypot operation? Our master's will never allow us to know that in our lifetime. However, I expect the documents, the ones that Starmer is trying so hard to prevent being published, will show that Starmer knew that Mandelson had failed his Developed Vetting (DV) with STRAP or some other British Intelligence vetting, but still appointed him to become ambassador. If that is the case, I cannot see how he could possibly survive as prime minister.
Also involved was William Reeves, an American Hedge Fund boss with a fortune estimated at £375 million. Reeves, who gave Labour Together £50,000, was a longstanding Liberal Democrat funder, who gave a large sum to David Laws when he was a minister in David Cameron's austerity government. (7)
Primary Sources
(1) Fenner Brockway, Labour Leader (12 November 1914)
Although conscription may not be so imminent as the Press suggests, it would perhaps be well for men of enlistment age who are not prepared to take the part of a combatant in the war, whatever be the penalty for refusing to band themselves together as we may know our strength. As a preliminary, if men between the years of 18 and 38 who take this view will send their names and addresses to me at the addresses given below a useful record will be at our service.
(2) Fenner Brockway and Clifford Allen, Labour Leader (3 December 1914)
Whilst there may not be any immediate danger of conscription, nothing is more uncertain than the duration and development of the war, and it would, we think, be as well of men of enlistment age (19 to 38) who are not prepared to take a combatant's part, whatever the penalty for refusing, formed an organisation for mutual counsel and action. Already, in response to personal appeals, a large number of names have been forwarded for registration, and many correspondents have expressed a desire for knowledge of, and fellowship with others who have come to the same determination not to fight. To meet these needs 'The No-Conscription Fellowship' has been formed, and we invite men of recruitment age who have decided to refuse to take up arms to join.
(3) Isabella Ford, The Labour Leader (30th September, 1915)
His (Keir Hardie) extraordinary sympathy with the women's movement, his complete understanding of what it stands for, were what first made me understand the finest side of his character. In the days when Labour men neglected and slighted the women's cause or ridiculed it, Hardie never once failed us, never once faltered in his work for us. We women can never forget what we owe him.