London— To date, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has not been linked to any alleged wrongdoing uncovered by the commission Epstein files. But his decision to give the vital job of ambassador to Washington DC to another politician whose ties to Jeffrey Epstein were exposed in the documents sparked a fierce backlash.
As the most turbulent week of his premiership comes to an end, Starmer is facing calls from his political opponents and some party allies to step down from his top job in Britain.
What did he know and when did he know it? These are the big questions Starmer faces amid outrage over his decision last year to appoint Peter Mandelson as Britain’s top diplomat in the United States, despite Mandelson having known links to Epstein.
Documents released by the US Congress last year showed that Mandelson maintained contact with Epstein after the convicted pedophile was released from prison, and the recent massive file dump by the Justice Department last week raised damning questions about whether he may have been sharing state secrets with the American financier.
What does the Epstein files say about Peter Mandelson?
Starmer may have hoped he would deal with the Mandelson scandal when he dismissed him from the US ambassadorship last September. This came after the US House of Representatives released files showing that Starmer’s Labor colleague had maintained a close relationship with Epstein for years following his conviction in 2008 for soliciting prostitution and procuring a child for prostitution.
CARL COURT/POOL/AFP/Getty
But last Friday there was a political earthquake. The latest published documents from the Justice Department appear to do so show that While Mandelson was a member of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s cabinet as that cabinet grappled with the seismic fallout from the 2008 global financial crisis, he shared confidential, market-sensitive British government information with Epstein. The information could well have benefited the New York financier and his clients.
The London Metropolitan The police are now investigating Mandelsonconsider whether they amount to misconduct in public office, a charge that carries a possible life sentence. Starmer’s office said on Tuesday that it had conducted its own review of the documents released on Friday and that it appeared “safeguards” relating to the improper sharing of confidential information were compromised.
Starmer says Mandelson “lied repeatedly” and betrayed Britain
On Wednesday, the prime minister told lawmakers that Mandelson – a veteran Labor Party politician with a reputation as a ruthless, media-savvy problem solver – had continually lied to the government about the extent of his relationship with Epstein during his selection for the ambassadorship.
“Mandelson betrayed our country, our parliament and my party… he repeatedly lied to my team when asked about his relationship with Epstein before and during his tenure as ambassador. I regret appointing him,” Starmer said.
Although Starmer may not have been clear about the extent of Mandelson’s ties to Epstein when he appointed him as the UK’s representative in Washington DC, British lawmakers have sharply criticized the government’s vetting process and stressed that some elements of Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein were public at the time he was given the position.
US Department of Justice
Opposition Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch has questioned Starmer’s judgment in appointing Mandelson to such an important diplomatic post.
“The Prime Minister can’t blame the process. He knew it – it was on Google. If the Conservative research department could find out this information, then why couldn’t Number 10?” Badenoch said in Parliament on Wednesday, referring to the Prime Minister’s office at 10 Downing Street in London.
The pressure on the Prime Minister is growing
That skepticism has resonated with British lawmakers across party lines, with Starmer facing a fierce backlash within his own party.
Rachael Maskell, a member of Starmer’s ruling centre-left Labor party, told the BBC that the prime minister’s position was “untenable” and he had “no choice” but to resign. Another Labor MP, Jonathan Hinder, told the BBC that Starmer’s decision to appoint Mandelson as US ambassador was a “catastrophic political and moral mistake”.
In a social media post on Thursday, Badenoch called on Labor MPs to join their opposition party in pushing for a vote of no confidence in Starmer.
“My message to Labor MPs is: If you want the change that you know the country needs, come and talk to my team. I am ready to seriously talk about a vote of no confidence. Because at the moment Britain is not being governed,” Badenoch said.
Starmer’s profuse apologies and anger at an old colleague
The British head of state is now in damage control mode. He agreed this week to a demand from lawmakers to publicly release documents related to Mandelson’s vetting and appointment, as well as the “due diligence” conducted by his government.
On Thursday, he also issued a full apology to Epstein’s victims and sought to quell anger within his own party.
“I’m sorry, I’m sorry for what was done to you, I’m sorry that so many people in power let you down, I’m sorry that you believed Mandelson’s lies and appointed him,” Starmer said, addressing the victims of Epstein’s sex crimes. “I was lied to. Deceived. Am I now frustrated and angry that the good work we’re doing is losing focus? … Of course I’m angry and frustrated about that.”
Peter Nicholls/Getty
Speaking Thursday to BBC News, CBS News’ affiliate network, Epstein survivor Marina Lacerda, who was groomed by the late sex offender as a young teenager, said: praised Starmer for apologizing so directly, but said the concern for the future must be “what kind of justice will be delivered.”
“I have to commend him for admitting on national television that he was wrong and apologizing to us,” Lacerda told the BBC’s Newsnight. “I think that’s a big step, right. There are also people here in America who haven’t even tried to apologize to us. So I have to commend him for that.”
But for a prime minister who, according to political pollster YouGov, has already done so historically low approval Ratings last month before the latest Mandelson revelations made the future seem deeply uncertain.
What are the chances of Starmer holding out?
Last year’s sharp policy reversals on a number of unrelated issues had already weakened Starmer’s authority in his party. A stagnant economy and concerns over immigration have also led to Trump ally Nigel Farage’s populist, right-wing Reform Party gaining public support, leading many analysts to question Starmer’s political acumen and the viability of his term as prime minister.
It is unclear what might emerge if Starmer’s office releases the review documents related to Mandelson’s appointment. But on Thursday evening the prime minister found himself in the weakest position of his 18 months in office.
According to analysis published on Thursday by Eurasia Group, the chances of Starmer keeping his job are just 20%.
“Until now, Eurasia Group believed the prime minister would be challenged for the Labor leadership this year and that his critics had a 65 percent chance of unseating him,” the organization said. “We now believe the prospect has increased to 80%.”
