Alex Salmond has said in retrospect he thinks it was “daft” for him to resign as Scotland’s first minister, and SNP leader, after losing the independence referendum

In an interview for a documentary to mark the 10th anniversary of the poll, which took place on 18 September 2014, Salmond said that when he stood down he thought independence would be achieved “in a reasonable timescale”.

He told the programme:

I thought to make a point of departure for the referendum in the future was a right thing for the national movement. Looking back, that was a mistake.

Now, in retrospect, that was a daft thing to do. But then … I thought we were set for independence in a reasonable timescale.

If you’d told me then that 10 years later, we’d still be waiting despite the manifest opportunities there have been, then I would have said, ‘well, I’ll just hang about then and see the matter through’.

Scots voted to remain part of the UK by 55% to 45%. Salmond’s successor, Nicola Sturgeon, argued that Brexit meant a second referendum was justified, but the UK government has repeatedly refused to allow one, and polling suggests Scotland remains fairly evenly divided between supporters and opponents of independence.

In her own interview with the programme, Sturgeon questioned Salmond’s suggestion that he would have been better placed to deliver independence. She said:

Clearly he’s going to think that he could have done things so much better. I say that in as gentle a way as possible, to coin one of his favourite phrases.

Salmond and Sturgeon used to be close allies, but they fell out bitterly over after Salmond faced multiple accusations of sexual misconduct, which he denied. He was prosecuted but acquitted on all charges.

The documentary will be broadcast on ITV Border Scotland at 8.30pm on Thursday.

The government’s defence review should consider the importance of Britain being able to “wage peace” as well as war, Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, told peers.

In a debate in the House of Lords on Sudan this morning, Welby said the strategic defence review (SDR) announced by Labour should include a “peace-building option”, to stop conflict before it happens.

Peace building was “a pillar notably absent” from previous defence reviews, he said. He went on:

A peace-building option, well developed and acting in areas of fragility, would extend our influence, protect our interests and guard against fresh waves of migration …

In other words, the SDR should be full spectrum, preparing this nation not only to wage war but to wage peace as well. I fear that may not be the case …

Stopping conflict before it happens via peaceful, political solutions should be central to any security and defence root and branch redesign.

As PA Media reports, Sudan descended into conflict in April 2023 after months of worsening tensions turned into open fighting between rival factions, including the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), seeking control of the country.

Welby described Sudan as a “human catastrophe on an extraordinary scale” and said the use of “vast quantities” of humanitarian aid only results in temporary solutions.

He also said that, being based in Canterbury and with a diocese on the south coast, he knew that “a very high proportion” of the people arriving in the UK on small boats are from Sudan.

Keir Starmer has complained about the media’s habit of interpreting his failure to rule out tax measures ahead of the budget as evidence they will happen.

He expressed his frustration speaking to reporters accompanying him on his flight to Washington, when he was asked if Labour would scrap the 25% council tax discount for single people.

But his answer failed to overpower age-old journalism instincts – with reporters duly filing stories saying he was refusing to rule out the discount being scrapped.

Starmer was responding to a question about whether the government was getting rid of the discount, worth around £3bn, and whether this would amount to a “punishment beating” for pensioners who qualify if they live on their own.

He replied:

No, absolutely not

And let’s just try to quash this now. The budget is on October 30. So, between now and then, you are all going to ask me questions, as you did before the election, ‘will you rule out X, Y, Z?

And knowing that I’m not going to say before the budget what we’re going to do, you will then write a story saying, ‘refused to rule out X, Y, Z’.

I’m not going to say before the budget what we’re going to do.

That does not mean that I’m ruling in anything that you might be putting to me, it simply means, like every prime minister, we’re not going to reveal what’s in the budget before we get to it.

At PMQs on Wednesday the Tory MP Louie French asked Starmer if he would rule out rule out “scrapping concessionary travel fares and council tax discounts, which also help millions of pensioners across the UK”. Starmer gave French the same answer he gave reporters on the flight to Washington, saying he would not pre-empt the budget.

But reporters began to focus on the single-person council tax discount because earlier on Wednesday Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, did rule out getting rid of concessionary bus fares for pensioners, their free prescriptions, and free TV licences available to people 75 or older on pension credit.

When asked about the government ruling out some tax rises but not others, Starmer replied: “We’ve got to look at everything in the round.”

The Local Government Association has said the mandatory single-person discount should end. In a report last year it said councils should instead have more discretion to decide their own support schemes for vulnerable adults.

James Cleverly has suggested that his own modesty is partly holding him back in his campaign to be the next Tory leader.

He made the argument in an interview with the BBC’s Nick Robinson in which he claimed that, although he was better qualified than his revivals, his reluctance to boast about it led to him being “underestimated”.

Cleverly is one of four candidates left in the contest. In the latest round of voting on Tuesday, he was joint third with Tom Tugendhat, behind Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick, who came top.

But Cleverly has more ministerial experience than the others, and he has held two of the three so-called great offices of state (having been foreign secretary, and home secretary – but not chancellor) – something few politicians achieve.

Speaking on Robinson’s Political Thinking podcast, Cleverly said:

I’ve outperformed everyone else on this leadership ticket … I’ve outperformed all the other runners and riders by a country mile - outperformed almost everyone else in my parliamentary intake. If you Tipp-exed the words ‘James Cleverly’ off my political CV and slid it across the desk, you’d look at it and go, ‘bloody hell’.

Cleverly claimed that he was “really good at his job”, but that his talents weren’t always appreciated because his reluctance to go on about this.

I’m really good at my job. And I’ve spent a lot of my career being a little bit diffident. I’m surrounded in my work by people that parade their accomplishments like peacock feathers. And that’s not a criticism, it’s just an observation.

I’ve perhaps through my career been a little bit less like that. And I’m therefore conscious that sometimes I’ve been under-estimated …

I’m actually really quite good at my job. And I’m a bit fed up of pretending that I’m not good at my job.

Here is Helena Horton’s story about the high court ruling saying the proposed new coal mine at Whitehaven in Cumbria should not go ahead.

Even when Keir Starmer was on course earlier this year to win the election by a landslide, pundits were saying that, given the number of “tough choices” the government would have to take, it would not take long before it became unpopular. Today the polling firm Ipsos has released its latest Political Pulse opinion survey and these predictions have turned out to be accurate; Labour’s ratings have fallen rapidly.

Labour is still much more popular with voters than the Conservative party. But, over the summer, the number of people saying they view Labour, and key figures like Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves, unfavourably has risen significantly.

Here are the figures for the Labour party.

Here are the figures for Starmer.

And here are the figures for Reeves.

The Ipsos polling does not include voting intention (VI). Asking people who they would vote in a general election is rather pointless at this stage in the electoral cycle, and polling companies mostly have not been publishing VI figures. But some in the Labour party may be alarmed by this snippet in Dan Bloom’s London Playbook for Politico.

A More in Common poll shared with Playbook has Labour’s lead down to just 4 (!) points — with the party on 29 percent, Tories 25, Reform UK 18 and Lib Dems 14. An Ipsos tracker adds 46 percent of voters view Starmer unfavorably — up 8 points since August. He never could expect much of a honeymoon.

Ipsos says, at 46%, Starmer’s unfavourability rating is his joint highest as Labour leader. The only other time so many people were saying they were unhappy with his performance was just after Labour lost the Hartlepool byelection in 2021.

But it is not all bad for Labour. Although the Conservative party is slightly less unpopular than it was at the time of the general, the Ipsos figures shows that its recovery still has a long way to go.

And Starmer has a higher net favourability rating than any of the four Tory leadership candidates left in the contest (Robert Jenrick, James Cleverly, Kemi Badenoch and Tom Tugendhat).

Commenting on the figures, Keiran Pedley, director of politics at Ipsos, said:

There are some early warning signs in these numbers for Keir Starmer and Labour. Whilst the next general election is several years away – and perceptions of Labour remain stronger than perceptions of the Conservative Party – these figures do represent a sharp drop from those recorded in August.

Good morning. Keir Starmer is in Washington today where he is holding talks in the White House with President Biden which should confirm a decision that might help Ukraine significantly in its war against Russia. Dan Sabbagh is travelling with him, and here is his overnight story.

The key meeting will take place late tonight. This blog will have closed by then, and most of our coverage of the Ukraine elements of Starmer’s trip will be on our Ukraine war live blog, which is here.

Back in the UK, parliament is now in recess, because the party conference season is starting this weekend (with the Liberal Democrats, in Brighton). The government is focusing on an announcement that will toughen the law on what it describes as “the sharing of non-consensual intimate images” – or ‘“revenge porn”, as it is more commonly known.

“Revenge porn” is already illegal; it is an offence under section 66B of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. But today Peter Kyle, the science secretary, is announcing that online porn will now be place in the most serious category of online offence under the Online Safety Act.

Explaining what this will mean in practice, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology says in a news release:

The Online Safety Act will require social media firms and search services to protect their users from illegal material on their sites, with protections due to come into force from spring next year. The most serious forms of illegal content are classed as ‘priority offences’ meaning regulated online platforms will have additional duties to proactively remove and stop from appearing on their sites.

Today’s move will mean intimate image offences are treated as priority offences under the Act, putting them on the same footing as public order offences and the sale of weapons and drugs online.

If firms fail to comply with their duties the regulator Ofcom will have robust enforcement powers, including imposing fines that could reach up to 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue.

And this is how Kyle explained it in an interview with Sky News this morning.

The two actions that will result from what I’m doing today is that social media companies must take action to prevent any material going online in the first place. They must prove to our regulator Ofcom that they have taken the measures – in other words, they are using the algorithms – to protect people, not to allow content to go on.

Secondly, if content does make it onto these platforms, the platform owners must take action to remove it swiftly. If they don’t, there will be very heavy fines as a result.

What I’m trying to do is move away from the fact where these companies are allowed to produce products into our society, harms emerge, and then we deal with the harms. What I’m trying to do is make sure the safety is baked in from the outset, so the harms don’t emerge in the first place.

There is not much in the diary today, but the UK politics news never dries. I’m sure we will find plenty to cover.

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. I’m still using X and I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I’m also trying Bluesky (@andrewsparrowgdn) and Threads (@andrewsparrowtheguardian).

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.