The Prime Minister changed his plans hours after Conservatives accused him of a ‘cover-up’ and Angela Rayner turned on him
Keir Starmer faces fury from Labour MPs (Image: Getty)
Keir Starmer has carried out a humiliating climb-down in order to avoid a potential devastating defeat over Peter Mandelson. It came just hours after Tories accused him of a “cover up” and Labour colleague Angela Rayner made a spectacular intervention. The change of policy came as MPs were debating demands for the Government to publish documents revealing what Sir Keir knew about former Labour grandee Peter Mandelson, when he was made Britain’s ambassador to the US. That includes details of Mandelson’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein,
Sir Keir had attempted to exclude papers “prejudicial to UK national security or international relations”. This was the topic of a huge row during Questions to the Prime Minister, when Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the Prime Minister was taking part in a “cover up”. And there was a danger that the Government would lose a vote on the restriction today. In addition, even Labour MPs who were willing to vote with the Government were unhappy about being ordered to do so.
But Sir Keir has now accepted Tory demands that the Intelligence and Security Committee, a joint committee of the House of Lords and Commons, will decide instead what should be published. This is what Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called for, but Sir Keir was placed under additional intense pressure when former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner also demanded the Committee be given a role.
A Tory spokesman said: “Kemi forced Starmer to admit he’d known Mandelson was still hanging out with Epstein after the child sex conviction, and No10 went ahead and appointed Mandelson anyway. You could feel in the Commons that was the moment Labour MPs stopped backing the Prime Minister. The government have now had to cave to Kemi’s demand for all documents to go to the ISC. Starmer is no longer in control, Kemi is calling the shots.”
Ms Rayner, who was Sir Keir’s deputy prime minister until September last year, pointed to a previous disclosure motion she tabled in 2022.
In it, she said the Commons Public Accounts Committee should look at papers related to personal protective equipment (PPE) contracts.
Ms Rayner asked: “Should we not have the ISC not have the same role now in keeping public confidence in the process?”
Responding on behalf of the Government, Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds said MPs were “asking, quite fairly, a broader question, as is (Ms Rayner), about scrutiny”.
He said there was a “role” for select committees in the scrutiny process.
“There’s existing powers for the ISC in terms of scrutinising this,” Mr Thomas-Symonds added.
“I’m hearing what the House is saying and I will take that point away.”
MPs debated publishing the papers after Sir Keir admitted he knew about Peter Mandelson’s friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein when he appointed him ambassador to the US.
The Prime Minister said Mandelson “betrayed our country” by leaking information from the heart of government to Epstein.
The Prime Minister also said he had spoken to the King to have Mandelson removed from the Privy Council.
Mandelson, a political appointment rather than a career diplomat, was sacked from his Washington role in September last year over his links with Epstein, who died in 2019.
His continued association with Epstein following his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor had been widely reported before his return to the political front line when he was named as ambassador in 2024.
At Prime Minister’s Questions, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch – who has led a parliamentary push for papers relating to the appointment to be disclosed – repeatedly asked Sir Keir if he knew Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein had continued after the conviction.
She said: “Can the Prime Minister tell us did the official security vetting he received mention Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?”
Sir Keir replied: “Yes it did. As a result, various questions were put to him.”
The Prime Minister told MPs: “What was not known was the depth, the sheer depth and the extent of the relationship. He lied about that to everyone for years, and new information was published in September showing the relationship was materially different from what we’d been led to believe. When the new information came to light, I sacked him.”
