Keir Starmer’s headache over Peter Mandelson’s hyperlinks to Jeffery Epstein continues. Throughout an emergency debate within the Home of Commons this afternoon the previous US ambassador, who was sacked on Thursday, was described by one Tory MP as much less the “Prince of Darkness” and extra a “grovelling Lord Yum Yum”, to many giggles from the opposition benches. Nobody on the frontbenches was laughing.
The emergency debate – which lasted for 3 hours this afternoon – was granted to the Conservatives final night time by the Speaker Lindsay Hoyle. The PM wasn’t in attendance. Nor was the International Secretary, Yvette Cooper, beneath whose temporary these proceedings fell. As a substitute, a raft of junior ministers filed neatly into the Chamber and proceeded to spend the remainder of the talk trying completely depressing. As one eager observer identified, such public shows of despondency haven’t been seen on the frontbenches because the rushed dying days of Liz Truss’s premiership.
The aim of this debate was to name for extra transparency from the federal government over the vetting processes which led to the appointment of Mandelson because the UK ambassador to the US final 12 months. David Davis started proceedings working by way of Mandelson’s torrid political profession, and the allegations which led to his sacking final week. Davis supplied MPs a damning verdict on Mandelson’s character: “It could seem that Lord Mandelson has subcontracted his conscience for cash.”
Shortly earlier than the talk started, information broke that the vetting of the disgraced New Labour grandee had not even began earlier than he was appointed to the position on 20 December final 12 months. In a joint letter to Emily Thornberry, the chair of the International Affairs Choose Committee, Cooper and the International Workplace’s everlasting under-secretary Oliver Robbins wrote: “After Peter Mandelson’s appointment was introduced on 20 December 2024, the FCDO began the ambassadorial appointment course of, together with Nationwide Safety Vetting.” The letter identified that Mandelson was, nonetheless, the topic of a due diligence check performed by the Propriety and Ethics Group, which sits contained in the Cupboard Workplace.
This collection of occasions feels muddled. And MPs had been vociferous of their questioning of who knew what and when. This was the primary on the checklist of asks from the Conservative chief, Kemi Badenoch, who didn’t pull her punches over the PM’s absence. She referred to as on Starmer to “come clear” on what he knew about Mandelson and when he knew it and accused him of “hiding from parliament”. Badenoch, in an uncharacteristically sturdy efficiency, referred to as on Starmer to take accountability for Mandelson’s appointment to rapturous cheers from the opposition benches.
Different MPs equally pointed to what they understand as a deep lack of scrutiny and accountability from the No 10 management over this scandal. Thornberry identified that regardless of the International Affairs committee requesting to talk to Mandelson when his appointment was nonetheless solely a hearsay, no assembly was forthcoming. She additionally refuted stories of a gathering within the press when the Committee was on a go to to the US, clarifying: “the truth is, in fact, that we had a 15-minute interplay over breakfast whereas receiving a proper briefing from the diplomatic workers”.
Thornberry – who simply final week put herself ahead as a candidate to be the Labour Social gathering’s deputy chief – added: “When Lord Mandelson was appointed, pink flags had been clearly missed or ignored, and on the day that the American President lands in Britain for a state go to, the federal government is materially worse off.” That is clearly not an excellent search for No 10. And with Donald Trump touchdown within the UK later at present, it stays unclear how Starmer will deal with issues. Because the Lib Dem MP Max Wilkinson identified, Trump additionally options within the Epstein Information. He requested Davis: “If the Prime Minister is to be discussing this concern with President Trump later within the week, and the Prime Minister has to have affect over President Trump for excellent causes, that if the problem of Lord Mandelson relationship with Jeffrey Epstein comes up, as a result of President Trump can also be in that birthday guide, we perceive with the very notorious poem, what’s the Prime Minister going to say?” Davis replied, referring to the resignation on Monday of Paul Ovenden, No 10’s former Director of Technique and the PM’s speechwriter: “I’m not the Prime Minister’s speechwriter.” (“There’s a emptiness,” one MP replied).
Many Labour MPs are livid with the federal government and tensions are mounting. Within the days since Mandelson’s sacking, some have identified the hypocrisy in Mandelson remaining the Labour whip within the Home of Lords regardless of the allegations levelled in opposition to him, whereas others inside the Parliamentary Social gathering sit with out it. Rachael Maskell, the MP for York Central, misplaced the whip in July for voting in opposition to the federal government’s welfare reforms. Maskell and Diane Abbott (who can also be sitting with out the whip) spent a lot of the debate watching quietly from the entrance of the Labour benches. The Labour MP Richard Burgon, who’s an ally of Maskell and Abbott, described the maintenance of their suspension in mild of the allegations behind Mandelson’s dismissal as “utterly unfair”.
This debate was a humiliation for Starmer, and for the federal government. That no senior cupboard minister was current to supply a defence or perception into how Mandelson’s appointment was finally allowed reasserted the sense that that is an administration that lacks management. Mandelson could also be out of the federal government, however his poisonous legacy stays. If Starmer leaves it unchecked, his authority will proceed to erode.