Keir Starmer cannot lead Labour into the next general election, according to the party’s trade union backers.

In a huge blow to the prime minister, they said the party “cannot continue on its current path” and that change is needed at the top.

The intervention by the Trade Union Labour Organisation (TULO) comes as Starmer clings onto power despite more than 80 MPs calling on him to quit and four of his ministers resigning.

The PM is holding showdown talks with leadership rival Wes Streeting in Downing Street, where he will be asked how he plans to turn the government around after Labour’s humbling in last week’s elections.

In a statement, TULO said: “It’s clear that the prime minister will not lead Labour into the next election, and at some stage a plan will need to be put in place for the election of a new leader.

“This is a point where the future of the party we founded will be debated and determined, and we are working closely as unions to shape a shared vision on policy, political strategy and economic policy that will re-orient Labour back to working people.”

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Eurovision bosses have confirmed that audience members were removed from the competition’s first live semi-final after political chants were heard during the broadcast of the Israeli act’s performance.

On Tuesday night, singer Noam Bettan represented Israel at the semi-final with his song Michelle, where he was chosen to go through to the next stage of the song contest at the weekend.

During the opening moments of the performance, chants of “stop the genocide” could be heard coming from the audience, particularly towards the beginning of the song.

“As previously announced, ORF is broadcasting a clean audio feed live from audience microphones before and during every performer’s song,” they said.

“One audience member, close to a microphone, loudly expressed their views as the Israeli artist began his performance, and during the song, which was heard on the live broadcast.

“They were later removed by security for continuing to disturb the audience.”

It was also confirmed that three more audience members “were also removed from the arena by security” for what the EBU and ORF described as “disruptive behaviour”.

Notably, Eurovision’s YouTube upload of Israel’s semi-final performance does not include the “stop the genocide” chant.

Councillor Thomas Heald is a Scottish Conservative councillor for Dunblane and Bridge of Allan, a former Scottish Conservative and Unionist candidate for the Scottish Parliament, and a former political advisor in the Scottish Parliament.

It has been quite the week in UK politics, and none more so than here in Scotland.

For nearly twenty years, Scotland has been governed by a party that has mastered the art of escaping accountability. Well-documented declining public services, stagnant economic growth, ferries with painted-on windows, growing NHS waiting lists, and a school system sliding down the international league tables. Yet instead of a deserved hammering at the ballot box, all we saw last week was the nationalists being rewarded by the electorate with a fifth term in office.

At some point, as democrats, we have to confront an uncomfortable question: what exactly does the SNP have to do to lose?

Because under normal democratic conditions, two decades in power would bring scrutiny. Instead, the SNP benefits from a political culture where constitutional grievance too often overrides governmental competence. Failure is excused because the argument is never about delivery; it is always redirected back towards independence.

That has trapped Scottish politics in a permanent holding pattern.

Responsibility for changing the cycle does not rest with the SNP. They are content to remain in government as long as possible. Instead, it rests with the opposition, particularly the Scottish Conservatives.

As the dust settles on a, not particularly unexpected, poor result, we need to ask ourselves a more fundamental question: do we actually want to govern Scotland?

That may sound absurd.

Of course, political parties exist to govern, otherwise what is the point? It may be uncomfortable for those involved in party strategy, but too often the Scottish Conservatives have behaved like a party content to merely oppose, survive, and occasionally exceed expectations. This is, to a certain extent, a result of the circumstances following the 2014 independence referendum. Scotland needed a strong Unionist Party then, and we delivered that. But the results of last week have shown that, by and large, the electorate believes the threat of a repeat of 2014 is off the table, at least for the foreseeable future.

Unionism matters enormously to the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party; the clue is in the title, but opposition to independence is not a programme for government.

If the Scottish Conservatives want to become a serious political force again, we must start acting like a party that believes Scotland can and should be governed differently, not simply managed slightly better.

That means we must clearly express a distinctive, positive vision for Scotland’s future—one that addresses the needs and aspirations of all Scots, beyond the perpetual constitutional debate.

A Scotland with lower taxes and faster growth. A Scotland that builds homes instead of blocking them. A Scotland where aspiration is encouraged rather than viewed with suspicion. A Scotland where public services are judged on outcomes rather than slogans.

The manifesto for Holyrood 2026, entitled ‘Get Scotland Working’, was a genuine step in the right direction and one that I was proud to stand on. It was more optimistic, more serious and more policy-driven than those that have gone before. But manifestos alone do not change political fortunes. The brutal reality is that almost no one outside the political class reads them.

Politics is driven by perception, emotion and identity long before policy detail enters the conversation.

For years, the Scottish Conservatives have struggled with an image problem that no manifesto can fully address. Too often, we seem defensive, managerial, and reactive, qualities that do not attract optimism or confidence.

And voters notice.

The SNP, for all its failures, still projects belief. Labour at least attempts to project change. The Conservatives frequently project caution.

That is not enough in a political environment where voters are increasingly angry, volatile and impatient.

The rise of Reform UK should be understood in that context. Not necessarily as an ideological shift, but as a warning sign that many centre-right voters no longer believe mainstream conservatism is prepared to fight for anything meaningful.

But the answer is not to simply imitate Reform or chase every populist impulse. Ruth Davidson understood that the Scottish Conservatives only become electorally relevant when we build a broad coalition that reaches beyond the party’s traditional base and appeals to mainstream Scotland.

That means listening carefully to the frustrations driving voters towards Reform, whether that be concerns about economic insecurity, political detachment, cultural alienation or the sense that too many institutions no longer work for ordinary people. This can all be achieved without abandoning the moderate voters who ultimately decide elections in Scotland.

The Conservatives achieved their greatest modern success when we looked optimistic, competent and outward-looking: patriotic without sounding angry, serious without sounding technocratic, conservative without appearing reactionary.

Many centrist voters now feel politically homeless, too. They are frustrated by declining public services, over-government, identity politics and economic stagnation. But they are equally wary of politics that feels permanently furious or defined entirely by grievance.

The Scottish Conservatives cannot out-Reform Reform. Nor should we try.

We must articulate and champion a serious centre-right alternative rooted in aspiration, competence, and a clear vision for Scotland. One which is capable of appealing to both voters frustrated by the status quo and those weary of polarisation.

This will not be fixed by a one-hour meeting with party strategists, but at least if we can establish our end goal, we can implement a five-to-ten-year strategy.

In establishing this goal, we as Scottish Conservatives now face an existential choice. We can continue operating as a party primarily defined by resistance to independence, hoping SNP fatigue eventually delivers office by default. Or we can become a movement that genuinely seeks to reshape Scotland politically, economically and culturally.

One path leads to managed decline.

The other at least offers the possibility of relevance, at least outside the Scottish Borders and the North East.

Because devolution itself has not failed, not yet. But if Scotland continues to reward governmental failure indefinitely, faith in the institutions of devolution will eventually.

Michael Enea is a Welsh Conservative Party member who is a weekly columnist in the South Wales Argus newspaper. He is also the author of ‘The Pointy Finger’ blogging page.

So, in January, I made a bold prediction for Newport in the Welsh Senedd election.

Out of the six seats available for the Newport and Islwyn constituency, I predicted 3 seats would go to Reform, with 1 to Plaid Cymru, 1 to Labour and 1 to the Conservatives. I felt the Greens would miss out.

Looking back, I predicted the winning order correctly. I was slightly out however, as both Reform and Plaid Cymru won 2 seats each.

As the polls closed on Thursday, I also correctly predicted the so-called ‘Portillo Moment’. The big shock of the election? I said Wales First Minister Eluned Morgan would lose her seat – and of course – she did.

Five years ago, I stood as a Welsh Conservative candidate in the 2021 Senedd election for the Newport West constituency.

It was a difficult election. Half of the campaign period fell under tough restrictions imposed by the second ‘lockdown’.

All being said, I fought a robust and hard hitting campaign. At one stage, I topped over one million views on social media. Over 40 people attended my final campaign session in Marshfield on the eve of the election – including the then Welsh Tory Leader Andrew RT Davies. In the end, I gained a respectable 35 per cent vote share. This uplift in votes saw two Conservative Members of Senedd elected on the regional list system.

We almost got a third!

I achieved 10,353 votes, which was the highest number of votes ever obtained by a Conservative in a Welsh parliamentary election for Newport. It is a record that still stands to this day after Thursday’s election where the Conservatives only gained 8,847 votes (in what is now a bigger constituency).

Fast forward five years, and it’s fair to say, the 2026 Senedd election has been a difficult one for the Welsh Conservatives. Five years ago, the Tories secured 16 seats, however this time around they only returned 7 seats in a bigger Welsh Parliament now holding 96 Members of Senedd.

Obviously, the political landscape is very much different in 2026, when compared to five years ago. However, from a Conservative perspective, could they have performed better?

Firstly, a deeply unpopular incumbency rule allowed sitting Tory MSs a ‘priority pass’ at obtaining the top spot on each regional list.

This rule caused major splits, division and even defections among party members. There was real anger over this incumbency rule and lot of members simply ‘downed tools’ when it came to campaigning. Had a free vote been in place, it’s likely a quarter of the old Tory MSs may have failed to claim a top spot.

Secondly, it’s no secret a majority of Conservative Party members support abolishing the Senedd. Rather than risk turning the Conservatives into the ‘Abolish Party’ there were sensible calls to adopt a neutral policy of offering a ‘referendum’ or a four way ‘preferendum’ on 1) abolish, 2) independence 3) MaxoDevo or 4) Small Senedd.

Offering a referendum on devolution would have literally grabbed the headlines in the Senedd campaign. It would have propelled the Tories onto the centre-stage in the political debates and amongst the public. A referendum policy may have boosted the Conservatives up to a 20 per cent share of the vote. This would’ve returned around 19 Members of Senedd rather than the 7 that were actually returned.

To their peril, a referendum on devolution was totally dismissed by the Welsh Tory leadership.

Then there were the Tory election addresses that dropped through letterboxes across Wales. In my view, they were convoluted and over-loaded with information and text boxes. Meanwhile, the Reform leaflet was simple, easy-to-read, and outlined policies with ‘high impact’ wording. I’m not the only one to take this view.

Finally, the campaign slogan of ‘Fix Wales’ was simply too bland and unimaginative. It could’ve been a slogan used by any of the opposition parties. I’ll be honest, I was somewhat disappointed. A slogan of “Lower Taxes, A Stronger Economy” would have at least related to a right-lean political party like the Conservatives.

Obviously, I’m delighted the Conservatives have returned 7 members of Senedd, including our very own Natasha Asghar in Newport. This return is in the ‘ball park’ of what was expected and there is some relief that the party wasn’t totally obliterated with zero seats. However, let’s be frank, out of the 96 seats available, 7 is a poor return.

As the dust settles on the election, there now needs to be an honest, open and thorough review of the Conservatives performance in the election. More than anything, the ‘disconnect’ with the party’s membership has to be repaired, especially on the thorny issue of devolution and abolish.

There also needs to be a total clear-out of staff at the top of the Welsh Conservatives. A change of leadership is needed and that means Darren Miller needs to step aside as the leader. A two or three way leadership race, including a series of hustings, would be a good way to start re-engaging with the party’s membership base.

A total overhaul is now needed with a fresh start.

You must seek permission before taking children abroad

Red flags to watch out for

If you have concerns about parental abduction