Anger is rife on the Labour backbenches. Today, Keir Starmer confirmed during PMQs what this week’s New Statesman cover story reported: he knew that Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein had continued after the financier’s conviction in 2008 when he appointed him as the UK’s ambassador to the US. The Labour MPs sitting behind him were clearly less than impressed.
From the moment the latest release of the Epstein Files further revealed the extent of the New Labour grandee’s relations with the convicted paedophile, pressure has been mounting on Starmer to reveal what he knew and when. More so than at any moment in the lifetime of this Labour government, MPs are incensed with the leadership. Some have even begun to speculate that this scandal could prove fatal.
“I’m angry that it has gotten to this point,” one MP told the New Statesman. “PMQs made things so much worse.” Starmer disowned Mandelson, saying he “lied repeatedly”, adding that he “betrayed our country, our parliament, and my party”. But this did nothing to assuage the disappointment spilling from the backbenches after his admission that he knew about Mandelson’s long-term ties with Epstein. More than one described the current circumstances as a “shit show”, others said Starmer’s performance was a “car crash”. One MP with little sympathy for the Prime Minister said this current crisis is one of the government’s “own making”.
To make matters worse for the government, today the Conservative Party used their opposition day to table a “humble address” – a petition which can be used by Parliament to extract information from the government – to try and compel the Cabinet Office to release documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment.
Labour initially attempted to amend the Tories’ motion to call for all the documents to be published “except papers prejudicial to UK national security or international relations”. This went down badly with several backbench MPs – even some who have on the whole been sympathetic to Starmer’s government. After an intervention from Angela Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, the government has now adjusted the amendment so that sensitive documents will be instead referred to the Intelligence and Security Committee in parliament. One MP told the New Statesman: “Angela has played a blinder on this.” And a Rayner ally said that Starmer’s former deputy had been negotiating with the chief whip “all day”.
Ahead of the change in amendment, one left-wing MP told the New Statesman: “The motion currently enables a cover up and that’s how it will be perceived. It needs amending or dropping because it’s heading for defeat if unamended.” Another sympathetic MP said, after the government had changed the amendment: “I am much happier post second amendment than I was before”. One red-wall Labour MP said now they had the chance for any sensitive information to be sent to the ISC, they would vote for the government’s amendment. But they pointed out: “We’ve only got that after Angela intervened.”
Others are looking more widely at what this means for the prime minister’s position and that of his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney. As Ailbhe Rea revealed in the New Statesman this morning, it was McSweeney who pushed for Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador to the US. One left-wing Labour source said: “Today Keir tied himself so fully to [McSweeney] that they will have to go together – maybe not in the exact same moment. But very closely.” Another soft-left MP said: “I still want McSweeney out.”
Still, the soft-left within the Parliamentary Labour Party, many of whom have been burnt by the current Labour leadership, feel they don’t need to actively organise to force a change on Mandelson. The backbenches are so furious that they feel any movement to force consequences for the government is going to happen anyway. One soft-left Labour source said: “The government kowtowed to Mandelson, even when it was known what he’d done, out of fear that he’d bring them down. That cowardly tiptoeing looks like it could sink their own ship.” When asked what they thought might happen next, another Labour MP replied ominously: “[It’s] the end.”
In short, it’s not just the usual suspects who are fizzing with rage at the Prime Minister and his administration. The malcontents now include some MPs who have been consistently loyal. While some Labour MPs have shown up in the Chamber to defend Starmer (painting him as just the latest to be deceived by “serial liar” Mandelson) it is clear the mood is souring and things are becoming ever trickier for the Prime Minister.
[Further reading: How has Donald Trump escaped the Epstein files?]
Content from our partners
Related
Join the debate
Subscribe here to commentThere was a reason why Mandelson was portrayed as a snake in Spitting Image.
To quote a wiki on SI “Mandelson was portrayed as a snake that controlled the Labour Party by hypnotizing its members into leaning towards more conservative, anti-working class policies and also to prevent anyone from attempting to go against his influence. He particularly enjoyed coiling around Blair and whispering spin into his ear. He also possessed snake-like characteristics such as hissing (usually at left-wing politicians like John Prescott), drooling and swallowing people like Robin Cook whole.”
Everyone has known this for decades, apart from Morgan McSweeney and the PM, apparently.