The Prime Minister is under pressure to reveal exactly what he knew when the peer was appointed.
Keir Starmer sacked Lord Mandelson as US ambassador yesterday. (Image: Getty)
Sir Keir Starmer is facing questions over his judgement after sacking Lord Peter Mandelson as US ambassador over his former relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein yesterday. Lord Mandelson would not have been appointed as US ambassador had the Prime Minister known the depth of his association with the billionaire, a Cabinet minister said this morning. Scotland Secretary Douglas Alexander told BBC Breakfast: “Nothing justifies Peter Mandelson’s appointment in light of what has now emerged and our thoughts have to be with everyone affected by Jeffrey Epstein’s heinous crimes.
“But the reality is, in the last couple of days Peter Mandelson was in the White House with Donald Trump. The reality is the United Kingdom did the first trade deal of any government with the Trump administration. And the reality is, along with Peter Mandelson, the Prime Minister Keir Starmer has established a strong and important relationship with President Trump in the interests of the United Kingdom. He added: “So, in retrospect, of course, if (it) had been known at the time what is known now, the appointment wouldn’t have been made.”
Peter Mandelson’s former relationship with Jeffrey Epstein has been under scrutiny. (Image: PA)
Critics are demanding to know what Sir Keir knew when Mandelson was appointed.
The Conservatives have called for full disclosure on who in No. 10 knew what about Lord Mandelson’s links with Epstein.
The Opposition demanded the full publication of all papers and communications between Downing Street – including Sir Keir’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney – and Lord Mandelson regarding his appointment, along with any relevant vetting documents.
Shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Alex Burghart, said: “Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney and the Labour Government have serious questions to answer.
“The Prime Minister must come clean on exactly what he knew and when. The Government must immediately publish the Mandelson files in full.”
What do you think? Should Sir Keir Starmer resign over the sacking of Lord Mandelson?
Yesterday, the coordinator of soft-left Labour group Mainstream, Luke Hurst, said: “Peter Mandelson’s inevitable sacking is what happens when you put your party faction’s interest before your party and before the country.
“If Starmer keeps running a narrow and brittle political project it will break him and could break the Labour Party. We need a Government and party of all the talents and all the views.”
Former deputy leadership hopeful Paula Barker, another Mainstream supporter, also criticised the “delay” in dismissing Lord Mandelson, saying there should have been “no hesitation”.
She added: “The delay in sacking him has only served to further erode the trust and confidence in our Government and politics in the round. We must be better.”
