The first time Peter Mandelson resigned, I was Treasurer of a beleaguered Conservative Party that needed all the cheering up it could get. 

It was December 1998 and Tony Blair’s government, elected with a huge majority the previous year, had lost a key figure.

The Conservatives celebrated a supposed triumph, claiming some credit, although their demands for clarity regarding the obscure circumstances of Mandy’s significant secret loan from another minister played little to no part. They eagerly anticipated the downfall of the New Labour alliance.

That downfall eventually came—ten years later. Mandelson’s recent exit happened shortly after Angela Rayner’s departure from her role as Deputy Prime Minister, followed swiftly by the firing of a top aide from No 10.

This occurred after several controversies: the housing minister resigned after evicting tenants and raising rents, an anti-corruption minister stepped down amid a corruption scandal, and the Transport Secretary resigned after a fraud conviction came to light.

Such political dramas frequently lead public news narratives, featuring ministers entangled in scandals and scheming adversaries seeking to unseat them.

This sphere is rife with questionable lobbying, internal conflicts, inappropriate behavior, extravagant spending, affairs, questionable expenses, Downing Street gatherings, and favoritism in contracts—politics that often disengage the public.

Conversely, genuine political matters impact everyday lives. This involves citizens concerned about crime, illegal immigration, the affordability of essentials, the possibility of home ownership for themselves or their children, healthcare wait times, rising taxes, and the freedom to voice their opinions without fear of legal repercussions.

The first time Peter Mandelson resigned, I was Treasurer of a beleaguered Conservative Party that needed all the cheering up it could get, writes Lord Ashcroft (pictured)

The Tories congratulated themselves on achieving a ‘scalp’ and eagerly looked forward to the collapse of the New Labour project. Pictured: Peter Mandelson in 2019

And this – rather than any scandal in high office – is the real source of Keir Starmer’s woes.

My survey asked those who voted Labour in 2024 but say they won’t do so next time why this was the case. 

The biggest single reason – chosen by more than seven in ten of this group – was that ‘they haven’t got to grips with the country’s problems’. Nor do they believe the Government has a plan to do so.

Hence the second biggest reason: ‘Keir Starmer is not a good Prime Minister.’

For voters with better things to do, the Westminster game of who’s up and who’s down barely registers, except as the dull background burble of a tedious and unending soap opera.

That’s not to say it doesn’t matter – ministers should be accountable and behave themselves. Nor is it without consequence – the Tories’ obsession with their own machinations was one reason people could hardly wait to be rid of them (and one reason the party is finding it so hard to regain their attention).

But showing that he understood the difference between the two worlds is how Donald Trump managed to upend the American political establishment. 

His opponents missed the point and focused on the man and his character, which is why they lost to him not once but twice.

Mandelson’s resignation came days after that of Angela Rayner (pictured at the Labour Party conference last year) as Deputy Prime Minister and was swiftly followed by the defenestration of a senior No 10 aide

Think of it as a political version of the doctrine of original sin. As far as the voters are concerned, no bunch of politicians is any more virtuous than any other.

Their eternal salvation is a matter for a higher authority, but they can earn their earthly redemption through works.

When times are hard, voters care less about process than they do about outcomes. 

As my poll found, people tend to think it’s more important to get things done than to stick to the rules and conventions of politics.

This is especially true when the country faces seemingly intractable problems which successive governments couldn’t or wouldn’t – or at any rate didn’t – deal with.

Like Trump, Nigel Farage benefits from this impatience. I found a majority of all voters saying they liked Reform’s new plans to deport 600,000 illegal migrants, build secure removal centres and make unauthorised entrants ineligible for asylum.

However, only just over one in five thought the ideas could be delivered in practice.

From my focus groups, it was clear what people thought the obstacle was. 

This is the world of politics that dominates the front pages. It’s the kind of politics that alienates. Then there is real politics – the kind that has a bearing on people and their lives. This – rather than any scandal in high office – is the real source of Keir Starmer’s woes

As one of our participants put it: ‘It’s a brilliant policy, but how long will it be before human rights lawyers get involved, or Nato or the UN or whoever, and say ‘you can’t do that, it contravenes human rights’?’

Tellingly, in my poll, most of those who said they liked the policies but doubted they could be delivered in practice said we should try them anyway, since any progress would be good.

As things stand, this could apply across a whole range of policy issues, from borders to welfare and from energy to crime.

If the plans look a bit rough around the edges, enough voters might think, what is there to lose?

On the face of it, this makes life more difficult for the Conservatives. Not being in a position to lecture anyone on fiscal responsibility or competent government, it is hard for them convincingly to warn against potentially reckless change with Reform.

But as she seeks a theme for her party’s conference next month, could this offer Kemi Badenoch a glimmer of opportunity?

The last government didn’t do enough to solve Britain’s problems, she must acknowledge, and it made some of them a good deal worse. 

But just as there are no easy answers, neither is there anything inevitable about Britain’s decline. We can do more than rage against the way things are.

In other words: Don’t break the rules, change them. Rage is easy and change is hard, especially for a country that has forgotten how to live within its means and where too many expect the Government to do more than it can or should.

It’s a tough message, but someone has to deliver it.

Lord Ashcroft is a businessman, philanthropist, pollster and author. Find his research at LordAshcroftPolls.com.

A Tory-Reform alliance would beat Labour at the next election, poll reveals 

By Glen Owen, Political Editor

A joint Tory-Reform party would have a seven-point lead over Labour, a poll has found.

According to the exclusive survey, a ‘unite the Right’ alliance would poll substantially lower than the parties’ combined vote share as separate entities – but would still have enough support to beat Keir Starmer’s Labour.

The research, by former Conservative deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft, shows the extent of the reservations which exist within both Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage’s ranks over a pact – 61 per cent of Tory voters would back it, and just 50 per cent of Reform UK supporters.

Former Tory voters who have abandoned the party said the last Conservative government’s record on immigration was the main reason for doing so. 

The poll also finds disenchantment with both Labour and the Tories on the handling of the economy.

Just 26 per cent said they rate the performance of Sir Keir and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, while 27 per cent think Mrs Badenoch and her Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride would do better.

A joint Tory-Reform party would have a seven-point lead over Labour , a poll (pictured) has found

With Ms Reeves widely expected to raise taxes in November’s Budget, 52 per cent said she would not be justified in doing so, while only 24 per cent would support the move. 

Other findings include support for the display of flags in the street – with 39 per cent in favour and 28 per cent opposed – after controversy over whether it should be interpreted as ‘patriotic’ or ‘xenophobic’.

And there was a demand for former deputy leader Angela Rayner to quit as an MP following her resignation from the Cabinet for failing to pay the right amount of stamp duty on her seaside flat – 60 per cent want her to leave the Commons altogether.

Voters were narrowly opposed to Donald Trump’s state visit last week, with 45 per cent saying the US President should not have had the red carpet treatment by the Royal Family for the second time.