What we know Starmer knew about Madelson’s sordid links to Epstein | UK | News

Sir Keir Starmer received a brief two-page assessment from Cabinet Office ethics officials in late 2024 outlining potential difficulties with the appointment of Lord Mandelson as ambassador to Washington.

The document contained details about two previous government resignations and related controversies, as well as largely public information about conflicts of interest linked to Global Counsel, the lobbying firm Mandelson founded with clients in Russia and China.

The most critical section of the dossier addressed pedophilia financier Jeffrey Epstein, making clear that Mandelson maintained his friendship with Epstein after his 2008 conviction for soliciting child prostitution.

Officials are believed to have cited a 2023 Financial Times article that revealed the depth of the relationship via a 2019 JPMorgan internal report: “Jeffrey Epstein appears to have maintained a particularly close relationship with Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Lord Peter Mandelson, a senior member of the British government.”

The report stated that Mandelson stayed at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion in June 2009, while the financier was in prison, and the document included links to photos showing the two together.

A source familiar with the Cabinet Office review described it as “a two-page word document cut and pasted from Google” and questioned why this was the only review carried out before Starmer announced the appointment, describing it as “insane”.

The Prime Minister had previously asked

The report’s contents were not entirely new to Starmer, who faced questions at a press conference in January 2024 about whether Mandelson should answer for stays at the home of a convicted sex offender.

He said: “I don’t know any more than you do, and I’m afraid I don’t have much to add to what’s already there.”

The Cabinet Office document is now at the center of questions about Starmer’s judgment and political future.

The prime minister first admitted at the drop box on Wednesday that he was aware of Mandelson’s “ongoing” friendship with Epstein when he appointed him as US ambassador.

This admission stunned and angered Labor MPs; Many people who have long had concerns about Mandelson now demand answers to one overwhelming question: Why?

The Backbench mood turned increasingly toxic as Starmer attempted to make a statement at Prime Minister’s Questions, admitting he was aware of the friendship but claiming ignorance of its depth or extent, and stating that Mandelson had “lied to my team repeatedly” when asked about the Epstein relationship.

Three questions to ask before an appointment

Before his appointment, Starmer had aimed to provide concrete evidence supporting his claims by asking Mandelson three questions through his private secretary Morgan McSweeney: Why should the Epstein friendship continue after the conviction? Why would he stay in his New York home during the financier’s incarceration? Was he a “founding citizen” of an Epstein-backed conservation charity?

Mandelson reportedly told Number 10 that he did not stay at Epstein’s Manhattan flat in 2009, and publicly stated that he did not remember such a visit before.

The Epstein correspondence reveals a different story, with Mandelson’s message on June 16, 2009: “Are you staying at yours this weekend Friday-Sunday?”

Epstein, who was later incarcerated, responded by offering the alternative of a central Manhattan apartment, adding: “Press problems?” and “I’m excited to host your call and I’m sorry I wasn’t there.”

Mandelson confirmed that his visit to New York was special and “will be good”, saying: “Yours are better possibilities.”

Publication of evidence prevented

According to The Times, two factors prevented Starmer from publishing evidence supporting his false claims.

Scotland Yard contacted Number 10 on Wednesday morning to warn against the publication of material that could potentially harm the criminal investigation into Mandelson; Meanwhile, Starmer also lost the trust of his own MPs; because backbenchers signaled support for a low-key Conservative speech – an archaic mechanism Starmer has repeatedly used to obtain documents.

The Conservatives demanded everything from the Cabinet Office report to the entire McSweeney-Mandelson correspondence, as well as information provided to the security services during the investigation; The government proposed an amendment allowing exemptions for national security and international relations, prompting renewed opposition from Labor MPs.

Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner argued that the Intelligence and Security Committee should determine national security exemptions, implicitly arguing that the Government cannot be trusted.

Ministers capitulated after hasty discussions behind the Speaker’s chair between chief whip Jonathan Reynolds, his Conservative counterpart and members of the Intelligence and Security Committee, and prepared an immediate “draft amendment” providing for oversight of the ISC.

Focus shifts to the Prime Minister

The developments have left Starmer in limbo; Attention had previously focused on McSweeney as the driving force for the appointment; Starmer was a figure he fiercely defended as an “essential” team member in the House of Commons.

One backbencher assessed the situation bluntly: “This could be the end of Keir. Any lack of dominance from No 10 today, public support for Morgan in the PMQs, makes him look like a figurehead.”

Starmer’s decision seems more puzzling given that the two men were not close, hardly knew or liked each other; but McSweeney supported Mandelson throughout the long selection process.

Officials have been informed that ahead of the 2024 election, Labor will make a political appointment to the British embassy in Washington and that Mandelson’s name will be mentioned in civil service access talks alongside Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s former chief of staff and eventually Starmer’s national security adviser.

Even the late listing of George Osborne, a friend of former chancellor and Vice President J.D. Vance, could not derail Mandelson’s selection.

McSweeney-Mandelson alliance

The pair first collaborated during the 2001 election campaign, when McSweeney was a relatively young incumbent, and developed their relationship under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership as they worked together to wrest control of the party from the organized left.

Their bond grew so deep that a memo sent to Starmer about plans to confront the Corbynites was actually written by Mandelson; Meanwhile, this colleague, a Scottish Labor MP, served as guest of honor at a fundraiser for the parliamentary campaign of McSweeney’s wife, Imogen Walker.

Reports suggest that Mandelson directly assisted McSweeney in selecting candidates for the 2024 election.

Many Labor MPs are targeting McSweeney; one of them revealed that he confronted the Prime Minister directly over Mandelson last year and demanded the chief of staff be sacked; Starmer rejected this request.

Starmer’s best case scenario now relies on claiming that Mandelson misled him about the extent of the Epstein relationship; However, it remains undisputed that the Prime Minister knowingly appointed someone who continued his friendship with a pedophile after the conviction to supervise this private relationship.

The gamble that Mandelson’s political acumen suited him for this role backfired spectacularly.