Less than a week after Angela Rayner was forced to resign from the Labour government, Keir Starmer has a new political headache. Today’s Prime Minister’s Questions focused heavily on British Ambassador to the United States Peter Mandelson’s relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

“Was the Prime Minister aware of this intimate relationship [with Epstein] when he appointed Lord Mandelson to be our ambassador in Washington?” asked Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch. Citing reports from the Daily Telegraph about Mandelson brokering a multi-million-pound deal with the financier after he had been released from prison for child sex offences, the Tory leader asked if Starmer would stick by him.

Starmer, for now, has said that he will stand by his man in DC. But the PM is facing mounting pressure to take stronger action. In the last few hours, the Times revealed that a memo from Mandelson urging then-Prime Minister Tony Blair to meet with the financier had been blocked from release in the National Archives amid fears it could harm UK-US relations. Meanwhile, the Sun reported that he coached Epstein through “years of torture” over underage sex charges, emailing in 2008: “Your friends stay with you and love you.”

Add to that a stronger performance by Badenoch at today’s PMQ’s and it’s easy to see why the PM may be feeling uneasy. “This government has repeatedly — repeatedly — refused to declare Lord Mandelson’s full interests,” Badenoch said, “and as part of the appointment, there will have been extensive government vetting, including details and timings of Peter Mandelson’s dealings with Jeffrey Epstein. So will the Prime Minister publish all these documents, including those about his interests?”

The Tory leader’s attacks were echoed by Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey. “Lord Mandelson has admitted to continuing his relationship long after Epstein was convicted,” he said. “And there are more embarrassing details we don’t yet know […] Has the Prime Minister asked the ambassador what other compromising material the Trump administration might have on him?”

There was a spooky silence in the chamber as Badenoch probed. One could sense the tension on the Labour benches, as MPs were torn between the allegiance to their party and their disgust of Epstein and his crimes. The Tories, meanwhile, grew louder with each piercing question from their leader — something they have rarely experienced so far under her reign. All Starmer could offer was “due process” and “proper vetting” in response. The whole Commons knew it wasn’t enough. Should Starmer dismiss Mandelson, it will be an admission that either the Foreign Office’s vetting procedure is not fit for purpose, or that the Labour Party prioritised good relations with the US over concern for Epstein’s victims. The US Ambassador has admitted himself that more “very embarrassing” details will come out in the course of the US Government’s investigation.

Labour has not caught its breath from last week’s scandal, and now it has another to deal with. At the time of writing, several Labour MPs have broken ranks calling for Mandelson to be sacked. Left-wing challenger for the post of deputy prime minister Bell Ribeiro-Addy told The i that “There should definitely be an investigation […] and if the outcome is that he should resign, he should.” Liverpool Riverside MP Kim Johnson concurred: “I totally agree [with Bell]. But the fact is this was known before he was given this position in America as the ambassador.”

“Does the Prime Minister really think it is tenable for our Ambassador to remain in post?” Badenoch asked today. It won’t be the last time he has to answer that.

---

Max Mitchell is UnHerd’s Assistant Editor, Newsroom.

MaxJMitchell1

---