In 2010, at the first Labour leadership hustings, the candidates were asked by the GMB union president Mary Turner: “Would you invite Peter Mandelson to join your shadow cabinet?” Ed Miliband, who defined himself against the Blair era, replied: “All of us believe in dignity in retirement” (a line gifted to him shortly before by Tom Watson).
The Labour Party is today awash with people asking why Keir Starmer did not take a similar view. Less than a year after Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador, his close friendship with Jeffrey Epstein has returned to haunt the government.
In an interview with the Sun – following the discovery that he described Epstein as “my best pal” – Mandelson warned that there were more “embarrassing” revelations to come. He wasn’t wrong about that. In an email to Epstein in June 2008, following the financier’s arrest over child sex charges, Mandelson wrote: “I think the world of you and I feel hopeless and furious about what has happened,” adding that Epstein should “fight for early release”.
Yet No 10 cannot plead ignorance over the pair’s bond. It was more than two years ago that the Financial Times reported that Mandelson stayed at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse while the latter was in prison for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
This is why figures from all wings of Labour were incredulous when Mandelson – who was forced to resign twice from cabinet – was nevertheless named our man in Washington. (A former Gordon Brown aide told me then that the appointment would “make him and his interests, history and friendships the story any time the press wants. He is a walking page-two story.”)
John McDonnell tweeted in December 2024: “For many reasons associated with Peter Mandelson’s history in and out of political office, many will feel Keir has lost all sense of political judgement on this decision.” But it wasn’t only Mandelson’s traditional bête noires on the Corbynite left who were in uproar. Blue Labour founder Maurice Glasman confirms to me that he warned No 10 over the appointment, recalling how he was repeatedly shown photos of Mandelson and Epstein “buying clothes together” when he attended Donald Trump’s inauguration.
At the time, Mandelson’s defenders inside government argued that he was precisely the kind of political creature capable of charming the White House. And, unusually, both sides can claim vindication. Plenty argued that Mandelson, the quintessential “Davos man”, would be lost in Maga world (repeatedly warning that Trump would veto the appointment) but it didn’t take long before the president was holding his hand and complimenting his “beautiful accent”.
Yet the challenge that No 10 now faces isn’t proving Mandelson’s diplomatic credentials – it’s explaining why it didn’t consider Epstein a deal-breaker. Back in January 2024, when Starmer was asked by the FT about the pair’s friendship, he replied: “I don’t know any more than you and there’s not really much I can add to what is already out there I’m afraid” (with the air of a man desperate to move on to the next question).
Now, in the aftermath of Kemi Badenoch’s strongest PMQs performance against Starmer, No 10 emphasises that “extensive vetting and background checks” were carried out (a process that would have unavoidably encompassed Epstein). It made a judgement to stand by Mandelson, then, and – as of this morning – it is still standing by him.
One popular theory in Labour circles is that Trump’s state visit next week is keeping Mandelson in place. The UK government, the thinking runs, has no interest in amplifying the saga, enraging the White House (Trump has denied being a fellow contributor to Epstein’s 2003 “birthday book”).
Yet an ever-greater number believe Starmer’s stance is unsustainable. “Colleagues are incandescent,” a senior MP tells me, “he [Mandelson] has got to go.” While a minister warns that the scandal “makes a mockery” of Starmer’s crusade over violence against women and girls (others, even now, believe that the ambassador’s White House connections mean he is simply too valuable to discard).
What we can say with certainty is that Mandelson – who has shown an unrivalled capacity for reinvention – is on his last political life.
This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here
[See also: The walls are closing in on Peter Mandelson]
Content from our partners
Related
Join the debate
Subscribe here to comment