The continued, unresolved ambiguity about what British prime minister Keir Starmer knew about Peter Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with Geoffrey Epstein in the aftermath of the latter’s conviction has left Starmer in deep trouble.
Mandelson was questioned ahead of his appointment as ambassador to Washington and lied repeatedly, Starmer told journalists yesterday. He apologised for believing Mandelson. The former minister, who had twice been forced to leave Labour governments over improprieties, had, Starmer repeated, “painted a picture of barely knowing Epstein … I was lied to”.
He did not explain whether the political “due diligence” and security service vetting processes had relied entirely on Mandelson’s word.
Anger at the prime minister’s credulity has spread from the opposition to Labour backbenches, where many are now privately and some openly calling for him to step down. At Wednesday’s prime minister’s questions Starmer’s former deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, even insisted he could not be relied on to select which of the appointment process documentation should now be made public.
READ MORE
The controversy has been supercharged by the release in Washington of Epstein documents showing that Mandelson, as deputy prime minister to Gordon Brown, repeatedly leaked market-sensitive government financial information to his billionaire friend.
Police inquiries into allegations of misfeasance in public office are underway. There are also calls for the sacking of former Mandelson protégé, Starmer chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, widely believed to have strongly promoted the latter’s ambassadorial credentials.
Starmer, who boasts he was elected to clean up British politics, clearly succumbed, as did prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown before him, to the myth, heavily self-promoted, of Mandelson’s uncanny Machiavellian skills. Starmer is now paying for his gullibility and his poor judgment.
