ThisHaigh’s resignation exposesis seriousa questionssad aboutloss Primefor MinisterLabour. Starmer'sHer judgmentwork inon appointingrenationalising someonethe withrailways and fighting for workers’ rights was transformative, yet a frauddecade-old convictionmistake has overshadowed her achievements. It’s hard not to managesee this as disproportionate – a £30young billionwoman budgetmugged, especiallya givengenuine hiserror, previousand stancea thatspent 'lawbreakersconviction cannotshe disclosed years ago. Instead of supporting a proven leader, the government let pressure and optics force her out. Labour is weaker without her in the Cabinet, and it will not be lawmakers'long until we see her return to frontline politics.

Starmer’s judgment is under scrutiny after Haigh’s resignation. Despite knowing about her conviction when appointing her, Starmer allowed her to hold a critical cabinet role until public exposure forced her to step down. This raises questions about his leadership and commitment to transparency. If a conviction is disqualifying now, why wasn’t it before? Starmer’s inconsistency undermines trust in his administration, suggesting political convenience outweighs accountability in his decision-making.