Politics
Labour double standards called out
Novara Media’s Ash Sarkar has laid bare the blatant double standard in the Labour Party’s vetting process:
Worth remembering that Faiza Shaheen was deselected as a Labour candidate for liking tweets from the Greens *before* she was ever a Labour member.
What could possibly explain such an intensive vetting process for the left, and such an apparently shoddy one for the right? https://t.co/hSxjZfYKfN
— Ash Sarkar (@AyoCaesar) February 11, 2026
Labour have one rule for one lot, another for the rest
Sarkar’s interjection followed a post from the Times assistant political editor Geri Scott. Scott referred to a comment from Education minister Georgia Gould, who insisted the government were ‘unaware’ of Matthew Doyle’s links to Sean Morton when announcing his peerage.
Doyle reportedly campaigned for Morton, a former Moray Labour councillor. A court sentenced Morton in 2018 for possessing Child Sexual Abuse Materials (CSAM). Authorities brought charges against him in 2016, yet Labour waited a year before suspending him from the party. A recent investigation found that Doyle was jailed for further similar offences last year, shining a spotlight on Labour’s selective vetting.
Despite Gould’s deflection, Scott has pointed out the government were aware prior to the letters patent being sealed and passed to the King, adding:
A govt source says: “There is no established precedent for withdrawing a peerage nomination after the announcement stage.”
An X account responded and challenged Gould’s links to Mandelson herself:
Georgia Gould? daughter if Philip Gould? Appointed by Peter Mandelson ? See? dots dots dots all joining up
Sarkar points out this double standard by referring to the Labour party’s treatment of Faiza Shaheen. The party suspended Shaheen prior to the general election. The scandalous suspension came after old posts showed Shaheen liking content from the Green Party. Sarkar astutely points out those likes were prior to being a member of the Labour Party, whilst shining a light on what is (or isn’t) a ‘sackable offence’ in the eyes of Labour leader and PM Keir Starmer.
One X account commented:
You can’t say they’re not thorough when investigating things they are bothered about, it’s such a shame they have really bad priorities.
They can hardly say they weren’t warned, with the leader of the SNP tabling a motion 4 weeks ago in response to Doyle’s peerage:
It’s just 4 weeks since I tabled a motion opposing this very appointment to the House of Lords.
Why did Keir Starmer ignore the warnings, and the victims, and appoint him anyway?https://t.co/oBXOdUm9hF https://t.co/NJxMbFujGm pic.twitter.com/IiVFNQwt6O
— Stephen Flynn MP (@StephenFlynnSNP) February 10, 2026
Vetting process clearly works, but the boss shouldn’t get to decide
This issue once again exposes a blatant double standard at the heart of government. It also reveals the autonomy afforded to those in charge when it comes to deciding what ‘issues’ matter to them.
Sexual offences against children should really be on that list of concerns. And Starmer must answer why it doesn’t seem to actually bother him in the first place.
Featured image via the Canary