Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is facing mounting pressure from within his own party after admitting he appointed Lord Mandelson as Britain’s ambassador to Washington despite knowing the peer had remained in contact with Jeffrey Epstein following his conviction.
Labour MPs and ministers have openly questioned the prime minister’s judgement saying he is now “on the ropes” and facing growing calls to consider his position. A frontbencher was quoted as saying the situation felt “terminal” for Starmer’s leadership.
Downing Street initially said it would oversee the release of documents linked to Mandelson’s vetting and appointment, with Starmer insisting the peer had lied during the process. No 10 also sought to manage how the papers were disclosed.
However, after a backbench revolt led by former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, the government reversed course and handed control of the release to the Intelligence and Security Committee, a cross party panel of MPs and peers.
The Metropolitan Police has also intervened, warning that publication of some material could prejudice an ongoing investigation connected to Mandelson.
Criticism of Sir Keir Starmer has continued to spread across the Labour party, with Rachael Maskell warning that the prime minister faced “very serious questions” if he was to restore public confidence.
Also speaking on BBC Radio 4 Today, Liverpool Wavertree Labour MP Paula Barker said she was “disappointed” and “sickened” by Starmer’s admission, adding: “Quite frankly I think the country deserves better.”
She said she was “very glad” that control of the document release had been transferred to the Intelligence and Security Committee and that she was “absolutely furious” and “deeply ashamed” that the government had initially tried to retain oversight.
Asked whether Starmer still commanded confidence, Barker said he had shown that “his judgement is questionable”, though she added there was no alternative leader she was “prepared to back at this stage”. She also said McSweeney had “questions to answer” over his role in Mandelson’s appointment.
On Newsnight, Labour MP Barry Gardiner said the prime minister had tried to “duck… and hide behind process” during Commons exchanges, adding: “We were squirming… The backbenchers on the Labour benches were just going, oh for God’s sake, get on with it.”
When asked whether Starmer should resign, Gardiner said: “I think he needs to think very hard about what is in the country’s best interest.”
Former leadership challenger Rebecca Long-Bailey told Peston that appointing Mandelson had been a “catastrophic misjudgement” and said there were “huge questions to be answered” by the prime minister.
Backbench MP Clive Efford added that Starmer had been “badly advised” and suggested some senior aides should be replaced.
However, appearing on Sky News, Housing Secretary Steve Reed said Starmer and his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, were secure in their roles.
He said: “The problem when someone lies isn’t that they lied to you, because there can be liars in any walk of life, it’s what happens when you find out you’ve been lied to.
“He conned everybody. What matters is what do you do when you find out you’ve been lied to…
“He couldn’t have been more decisive. He took out Peter Mandelson on the spot as US ambassador.”
The controversy is threatening to overshadow the prime minister’s domestic agenda, including a major speech later today on regeneration funding for neighbourhoods across Britain. With MPs defying the government on document control and criticism spreading through the party’s ranks, Starmer is confronting one of the most serious crises of his premiership to date.
