Mandelson-Starmer latest: PM set for showdown with furious Labour MPs as he battles to save premiership

The prime minister’s private secretary, Morgan McSweeney, resigned on Sunday following anger over the government’s handling of the Mandelson-Epstein scandal.

Here is the full resignation letter:

“After careful consideration, I have decided to resign from the government.

“The decision to appoint Peter Mandelson was wrong. It damaged trust in our party, our country and politics.

“When asked, I recommended the Prime Minister make this appointment and I take full responsibility for that recommendation.

“Responsibility in public life must be assumed not only at the most appropriate time but also at the most important time. Under these circumstances, the only honorable behavior would be to step aside.”

“This has not been an easy decision. Much has been written and said about me over the years, but my motivations have always been simple: I have worked every day to elect and support a government that puts the lives of ordinary people first and leads us to a better future for our great country.

“Only a Labor government can do this.

“I leave proud of what we have achieved and saddened by my departure.

“But I have always believed that there are moments when you must accept your responsibility and step aside for a greater purpose. As I leave, I have two more thoughts:

“First and foremost, we need to remember the women and girls whose lives were destroyed by Jeffrey Epstein and whose voices went unheard for too long.

“Secondly, although I have not overseen the due diligence and review process, I believe that this process now needs to be fundamentally overhauled. This is not just a gesture, it is an assurance for the future.

“I continue to fully support the Prime Minister. He works every day to rebuild trust, restore standards, and serve the country. I will continue to support this mission to the best of my ability. It has been the honor of my life to serve.”

Lord Mandelson was sacked over his relationship with disgraced US financier Jeffrey Epstein, and anger in Westminster intensified after the publication of recent documents showing he leaked information to his friend while he was a government minister.

Independent reporter Nicole Wootton-Cane reports:

Independent’political editor David Maddox And Whitehall editor Kave Devlin reports:

Lucy Powell told Independent He said the vote on February 26 represented a “line in the sand” in Labour’s fight to stop the advance of Nigel Farage’s UK Reform.

Sir Keir Starmer is set to face angry MPs on Monday as he fights to keep his premiership alive.

The Prime Minister will meet with parliamentary Labor on Monday morning to reassure his own party that he is listening to their concerns.

He is also expected to make a statement on Monday afternoon about the Mandelson scandal and the departure of his chief aide Morgan McSweeney from the House of Commons.

Sir Keir Starmer faces further backlash after it emerged that deputy prime minister David Lammy had warned the leader against appointing Lord Peter Mandelson as US ambassador because of his links to Jeffrey Epstein.

Lammy’s friends and allies said: Telegram He was against Mandelson’s appointment and was in favor of extending Dame Karen Pierce’s term because of her connections to President Donald Trump’s inner circle.

Mr Starmer is said to be “devastated” by the scandal and is considering whether to remain Prime Minister, according to the publication.

Gordon Brown, who brought Peter Mandelson back into government in 2008, is speaking out about the former business secretary and calling for new anti-corruption measures to prevent government leaks of documents Mandelson is accused of doing.

When asked by Sky’s Trevor Phillips whether a new anti-corruption commission was a good idea, senior Tory Alex Burghart said: “It depends.” [on] what that commissioner will do, what their powers are and who they are.

“I think it’s very easy at a moment like this for politicians to say ‘if there was just one additional role everything would be fine.’

“In this case, the prime minister had a clear choice, he had clear information, and he made a bad decision.

“And ultimately there’s nothing that can really protect you against that.”