The ‘Peter paradox’ and how Labour’s bad run could boost the Tories but also beg old questions | Conservative Home

In the 1990s, there was advert for Ariston washing machines that achieved what every ad executive dreams of. It stuck in people’s minds.

It was based on the premise, and indeed the promise, that an Ariston washing machine would “go on and on and on”. If you want an idea of why such a seemingly banal line caught on you can watch the advert.

I remember it because it became an inside joke amongst a handful of political journalists when applied to Peter Mandelson’s career

“Mandel-son, goes on and on”

Now of course that could apply to the row around his sacking as our US Ambassador, the third government job he’s had to leave because of his private dealings – this time the length and depth of his relationship with paedophile and sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein.

The Daily Mail reports the beleaguered Prime Minister, who expressed “full confidence“ both Mandelson and the process of his appointment during last week’s PMQs where he was eviscerated over the issue by Kemi Badenoch, had a stand up row with his closest adviser Morgan McSweeney as the circle of blame edged closer to the man at the top.

Both Prime Minister and his Svengali have become the latest victims of ‘the Peter paradox’. Within the BBC documentary ‘The Brown Blair years’ you will see a former Cabinet Secretary honestly judge Mandelson as ‘the most able minister in government’.

Blair called him ‘brilliant’. At the same time he just radiated risk, from his complex and clearly sometimes ill-judged business, financial, and relationship decisions.

Starmer took that risk, and frankly as the paradox demands, at first it paid off. Mandelson was an effective ambassador in terms of his relationship with Donald Trump, but the relationship with Epstein is the key to him being removed, again, and probably for the last time, from Government.

Now it’s no longer about Mandelson, who is aggrieved at being ‘hung out to dry’ but all eyes, including his, seem turned on Starmer.

Starmer’s judgement, and capabilities have been steadily exposed and eroded over his troubled period in office, achieving in fourteen months, the kind of negative headlines and public distrust  the Tories earned themselves after fourteen years.

The irony is that one of the things that contributed to the Conservatives dreadful reputation ahead of the suicidally early 2024 election was their incessant changing of leader and infighting.

Now Starmer, in a situation that must haunt him, is facing open questions about his fitness to lead from Labour MPs. The Conservatives can scent blood in the water, and having rightly chewed up his previous Deputy Prime Minister, can see a way to weaken the man some call privately ‘the real deputy Prime Minister’, Morgan McSweeny.

In this endeavour they are being admirably assisted by a cohort of left wingers who also want McSweeny, and possibly Starmer, gone.

Despite a clumsy attempt to throw the Foreign Office under the bus for “doing all the vetting process” – the process Starmer had insisted was robust as he defended Mandelson – the circle of blame for this, and a lot of other issues, is getting closer and closer to just two people.

Starmer’s team have weirdly assisted in landing blows directly on the Prime Minister, the more they’ve tried, and failed, to throw the blame further away. It’s actually a lesson for all leaders, that as a defensive tactic it really has a bad track record in terms of success.

Tony Blair handled his first real scandal very differently, and his personal poll rating at the time was in the sort of figures that Starmer could only dream of, and resembled percentages more usually associated with a North Korean ‘election’.

In the ‘The Bernie Ecclestone affair’, which still sounds like a 1950’s radio crime caper, a donation the Motor racing tycoon had given Labour before the ‘97 election was perceived as more in ‘bribe’ territory, when motor racing subsequently received an exemption on a ban on tobacco advertising. Blair’s response was to do an interview on prime time TV, where he owned a mistake, and asked the public to keep faith with “I think a pretty straight kinda guy”. Whatever you think in hindsight. It worked.

I don’t know if Starmer could even begin to understand how to replicate that, let alone have the political skill to carry it off. Now, it’s too late anyway, and besides Starmer is no Blair. Indeed it’s probably accurate in political terms to say Starmer is no Mandelson.

I’m increasingly convinced we are witnessing the start of a long drawn out downward trajectory that doesn’t see him contest the next election as Labour leader.

However, as I’ve said before it’s not so much individuals who will see a leader off, though of course they are part of it, it is more the numbers. It will be interesting to see what might change polling wise as a result of the disastrous ‘Phase 2’.

Despite the glee from the current poll leaders, and their supporters, many of whom will no doubt harangue me in the comments section because ‘The Conservatives are finished mate’ – and on and on and on- I still maintain, just objectively, there are a set of circumstances, not inevitable but entirely possible, where Labour haemorrhage more support, and you see polling that has Reform still out in front but the Conservatives second.

The Conservatives have had a good two weeks of opposition, and are about to give what many have long been demanding, a sight of some new policy, particularly on the economy, and building on some of the existing and already announced immigration policy, which has happened however much people try to claim, ‘they haven’t said anything’.

Kemi Badenoch and her shadow Cabinet will, and frankly can, take a lot of the credit for Starmer’s very recent woes, where he has left himself wide open to criticism, but there is a small alarm bell ringing that her whole team should just keep a watch eye out for.

Against a backdrop of criticism, some of it fair, some of it not, fighting for cut through, sometimes missing an open goal, sometimes smashing the ball home with deadly intent if Badenoch and the Conservatives can drag the party past Labour and chasing Reform, maths will step in.

The right of politics – and those voters who see themselves as varying degrees of ‘right of centre’ will look at that, especially if it solidified, and start to revive a discussion that both Reform UK and the Conservatives had tried to put to bed – the question of a pact, a deal, a coalition?

I think both party’s memberships are lukewarm or divided on the idea right now. One of them has vowed to destroy the other, which is a bad starting point, nor does everyone want it. The two leaders for one.

I’m certainly not advocating the Tories ease off their efforts to get off a stubborn 17 percent in the polls. Nor am I saying they should do a deal if it were there to be done.

However, my prediction is if the Conservatives do overtake Labour, then both they and Reform are going to have to think how they handle that ‘deal’ question again because I’d bet a chunk of cheddar it gets asked.