A CABINET minister has said Peter Mandelson should not have been made UK ambassador to the US, as criticism mounted over prime minister Keir Starmer’s judgment in appointing him.
Douglas Alexander, the Scotland secretary, told the BBC that Mandelson’s appointment was seen as “high-risk, high-reward” but that newly revealed emails changed the situation.
“If Keir knew then what we know now, he would not have made that appointment,” he later told LBC.
Starmer dismissed Mandelson on Thursday after reading emails published by Bloomberg in which Mandelson defended Jeffrey Epstein following his 2008 conviction. Mandelson wrote to Epstein: “I think the world of you and I feel hopeless and furious about what has happened … Your friends stay with you and love you.”
Stephen Doughty, the Foreign Office minister, told MPs the messages showed Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein was “materially different from that known at the time of his appointment.”
Mandelson, who admitted during vetting that he had maintained links with Epstein and regretted doing so, is said to feel ill-treated.
Labour MPs criticised the handling of the affair. Paula Barker said the delay in removing Mandelson had “eroded trust,” Charlotte Nichols said he should “never have been appointed,” and Sadik Al-Hassan questioned the vetting process.
The episode has drawn wider scrutiny of Starmer’s decision-making. It comes after deputy prime minister Angela Rayner resigned last week over unpaid stamp duty. Some MPs turned attention to Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, who played a role in Mandelson’s appointment.
In a letter to staff, Mandelson said being ambassador was “the privilege of my life” and he regretted the circumstances of his departure. James Roscoe, his deputy, will serve as acting ambassador.
The Financial Times reported that Global Counsel, the lobbying firm co-founded by Mandelson, is preparing to cut ties with him.
