London, United Kingdom. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he regretted appointing Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to Washington, accusing him of a “litany of deceit” over ties to U.S. sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Starmer said he would release information on the appointment while withholding any material that could harm national security or international relations.
Appointment documents and parliamentary vote
Starmer responded to a demand from the opposition Conservative Party that the government publish information on how Mandelson was appointed. He said the scope of documents released would be limited to avoid prejudice to national security or international relations.
Parliament was due to vote later on Wednesday on the release of documents related to Mandelson’s appointment.
Mandelson resignation and investigation
Mandelson, a former government minister when Labour was last in power more than 15 years ago, quit the House of Lords on Tuesday over links to Epstein. He is now under police investigation for alleged misconduct in office.
U.S. Justice Department files and responses
Files released by the U.S. Justice Department last week included emails suggesting Mandelson had leaked government documents to Epstein and that Epstein had recorded payments to Mandelson or his then-partner, now husband.
Mandelson has said he does not recall having received payments. He has not commented publicly on the allegations he leaked documents and did not respond to messages seeking comment.
Starmer’s actions and criticism from opponents
Starmer said he had moved quickly to strip Mandelson of titles and roles, accusing him of “betraying” Britain. He said he had agreed with King Charles to remove Mandelson from the sovereign’s formal body of advisers.
Opposition figures said Mandelson’s selection in late 2024 raised questions about the judgment of Starmer and his closest adviser, Morgan McSweeney.
Starmer told parliament he was angry about the disclosures, describing allegations of Mandelson passing sensitive information during the response to the 2008 financial crash as “utterly shocking and appalling.”
What do you think parliament should consider when deciding whether to release documents related to Mandelson’s appointment?
