DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Sue Gray’s ousting is proof that there is chaos inside No10

It is a truism that all governments ultimately end in chaos. Yet Sir Keir Starmer’s administration has pulled off the near impossible feat of starting in disarray.

The Prime Minister has not been in office 100 days but already No 10 is paralysed by dysfunction, indiscipline and incompetence.

Nothing illustrates this more than the ousting of Sue Gray, his hand-picked chief of staff, after a series of controversies.

The combative aide was embroiled in vicious infighting with colleagues, a row over her bumper salary and a scandal over cronyism and freebies. She may now be gone, but that damage can’t be undone.

Whichever way you cut it, this saga shows poor judgment by Sir Keir. His appointment of Ms Gray, a supposedly impartial senior civil servant whose Partygate probe ended Boris Johnson’s parliamentary career, never passed the sniff test.

Sir Keir Starmer has yet to complete 100 days in office, but already No 10 is paralysed by dysfunction, indiscipline and incompetence

The Prime Minister's appointment of Sue Gray never passed the sniff test, and the combative aide was embroiled in vicious infighting with colleagues, a row over her bumper salary and a scandal over cronyism and freebies

The Prime Minister’s appointment of Sue Gray never passed the sniff test, and the combative aide was embroiled in vicious infighting with colleagues, a row over her bumper salary and a scandal over cronyism and freebies

If he thought she was right for the job, he should have stood by her. If not, why recruit her to start with? Was it just a reward for sticking the knife into his political enemy?

Despite the Downing Street shake-up, it is unclear whether Labour can achieve credibility as a serious government.

Sir Keir has clobbered pensioners, he’s surrendered the Chagos Islands to an ally of China, the economy has stalled and he’s been exposed as a freeloader. And that’s before next month’s Budget. No wonder his approval ratings are plunging at a speed that would have alarmed Liz Truss.

As opposition leader, Sir Keir liked nothing more than berating the Tories for psychodrama. With Labour in power, it is like watching a sequel, but in technicolour.

A year of division

Today marks a year since the October 7 atrocities when Islamist terrorists stormed into Israel and engaged in an orgy of violence against men, women, and children.

While Israel is justifiably taking military action to de-fang Iran and its proxy armies Hamas and Hezbollah, the intervening months have heightened tensions within communities in Britain.

Week in, week out, protesters have marched through our streets chanting slogans and waving placards demanding the extermination of Israel. Many Jewish citizens no longer feel safe here.

For one year, protesters have marched through our streets chanting slogans and waving placards demanding Israel's extermination

For one year, protesters have marched through our streets chanting slogans and waving placards demanding Israel’s extermination

Today a study finds one in ten young Britons have a ‘favourable view’ of Hamas, while 16 per cent say the massacre was justified. Whether through naivety or witlessness, this is shocking.

Britain is historically an accepting, tolerant country but parts of our society are at loggerheads.

Sir Keir laments that a foreign conflict risks lighting the ‘touchpaper in our own communities’. Yet at the same time, he vilifies anyone who takes issue with mass immigration and multiculturalism, or warns it may damage social cohesion. 

At times of huge tension both at home and abroad, Britain needs a sure-footed Government.

It is a tragedy we seem to lack one.

Only four days ago, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater insisted her bill to legalise mercy-killing for the terminally ill would not be a slippery slope, nor lead to more deaths than law-makers intended. 

Kim Leadbeater (pictured) insisted her bill to legalise mercy-killing for the terminally ill would not be a slippery slope or lead to more deaths than intended, but it is imperative that any new law is scrutinised to avoid unintended consequences

Kim Leadbeater (pictured) insisted her bill to legalise mercy-killing for the terminally ill would not be a slippery slope or lead to more deaths than intended, but it is imperative that any new law is scrutinised to avoid unintended consequences

Yet already dozens of her colleagues want the eligibility criteria for assisted dying to include those ‘incurably suffering’ with disorders such as depression. 

State-sponsored suicide is a hugely sensitive and contentious issue, so it is imperative any new law is scrutinised to avoid unintended consequences. The responsibility on the Commons to consider this dispassionately and calmly could not be greater.

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk