cupure logo
charlietrumpkirkcharlie kirkdeathhomestatepolicekirksreveals

'A Source Of Deep Shame': Mandelson Blame Game Begins As MPs Rip Into Keir Starmer

'A Source Of Deep Shame': Mandelson Blame Game Begins As MPs Rip Into Keir Starmer
Keir Starmer and his former US ambassador Peter Mandelson.Keir Starmer’s decision-making was torn apart in the Commons today over the scandal surrounding his now fired US ambassador, Peter Mandelson, just hours before US president Donald Trump is due to touch down in the UK.After less than a year in the top job, Mandelson was sacked after new evidence revealed the ambassador pushed for his friend, convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, to challenge his 18-month sentence back in 2008. As Starmer tries to desperately to smooth things over ahead of Trump’s state visit tonight, MPs used an emergency debate in the Commons to raise further questions about the saga, including just what Starmer knew and when.Here’s a rundown of the top criticisms levelled at the prime minister this afternoon.Where was Starmer?Perhaps the most common attacj was over the prime minister’s failure to attend the emergency debate, requested by Tory backbencher David Davis.Instead foreign office minister Stephen Doughty was sent out to bat for Starmer – which Davis, a former Tory minister, described as “trying to defend an impossible position”.Fellow Conservative Dr Luke Evans asked: “Why is he here and not the prime minister answering those questions?“Because he clearly can’t answer them, and that’s no disrespect to him.“The prime minister said he didn’t know something, now he knows something. Could I ask, where is the prime minister and why is he not at the dispatch box?”Doughty said: “I’m here responding for the government, I’m the minister for North America, and he will also understand that there are very important matters taking place today that the prime minister and foreign secretary are involved with.“And, of course, we’ve seen the launch of the new Hillsborough Law today as well, which was referenced during the debate.”Doughty was also laughed at by fellow MPs when he said: “The prime minister had been explicitly clear that the new information is and was not compatible with the duty that we owe the victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s horrendous crimes against women and girls.”Tory leader Kemi Badenoch accused Starmer of “hiding from parliament” and urged him to publish the “Mandelson-Epstein files in full”.She said: “It is extraordinary – extraordinary – that on the eve of the president’s state visit, we are talking about the US ambassador who’s been sacked in scandal.”Conservative former minister Sir Alec Shelbrooke asked why even the new foreign secretary Yvette Cooper was not there, as it was one of the “most serious issues” the house has debated in parliament.He said: “I have a huge amount of respect for the minister who’s going to have to respond to this debate, but he has been sent to the slaughter today.“This was a decision that was made around the Cabinet table.”Just how much damage has this saga caused to Britain’s reputation?Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville-Roberts said Starmer’s “judgement and the UK’s presence on the world stage has been diminished by this affair”.Similarly, Liberal Democrat Max Wilkinson pointed out that the PM was going to be in a sticky position if Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein arises during Trump’s state visit.The US president has faced his own criticism over his links to Epstein recently, but Starmer is clearly rolling out the red carpet for him this week at Windsor Castle.Badenoch said Starmer “has shrivelled from leadership, he has dodged responsibility, he has hidden behind others” any time a crisis has occurred in his government.She said: “He has come to this house and hidden behind process and lawyerly phrases.“The prime minister has turned out to be everything he claimed to abhor, this is a government of sleaze and scandal, and Labour MPs know it.”There was a notable lack of Labour MPs willing to stand up and defend – or even comment – on Starmer’s handling of the row around Mandelson.Meanwhile, SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said: “What has happened to the moral compass of this place, of the office of prime minister?”Multiple MPs called on Starmer to apologise to Epstein victims from the Commons’ dispatch box “at the next possible opportunity”.“The greatest scandal of all is that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom appointed a man to that role knowing that he maintained a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, despite the fact that Epstein had been convicted” @StephenFlynnSNPpic.twitter.com/5GsrJejcZ8— Tom French (@tomfrench85) September 16, 2025What happens to Mandelson next?Richard Burgon, who did have the whip removed briefly after voting against the government over the two-child benefit cap, pointed out that Mandelson retains the Labour whip in the House of Lords.He added that there are Labour members who “think that’s completely unfair”.Independent MP Apsana Begum, who also had the whip removed after going against the government over benefits, pointed to other former Labour MPs, like Mother of the House Diane Abbott, who still do not have the whip.She said this suggested that MPs “appear to be held to some standards while Lord Mandelson appears to be held to another”.Were ‘red flags’ ignored in the vetting process?Yvette Cooper revealed today that Mandelson did not receive national vetting before he was appointed to be US ambassador.She also noted that the Foreign Office was not involved in the decision to approve his new role, saying the Cabinet Office carried it out.But Dame Emily Thornberry, chair of the foreign affairs committee, questioned whether those vetting Mandelson were told to “overlook” a “glaring national security and reputational risk”.She also noted that he had failed to appear in front of the committee before his appointment – even though career civil servants are regularly subjected to vetting tests, with some allegedly being quizzed just for being born in Belfast.“Does having significant information in the public domain about your relationship with an internationally prolific child sex offender not raise more red flags than simply being born in Belfast?” Thornberry said.“Is a civil servant a greater risk to this country because they are married to somebody who was born in the Middle East, or because they were close friends with Jeffrey Epstein?”Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said it was clear there was “obviously not sufficient due diligence done” in the vetting process.He said: “On the day before he was dismissed, apparently there were a lot of emails available to the prime minister which he either wasn’t given or didn’t read.” Davis pointed out: “Number 10 was well aware that Mandelson has continued his relationship with Epstein, after his conviction as a paedophile.“How the prime minister could possibly have thought it was a wise to appoint a man, who was on record consulting with alleged murderers and convicted paedophiles for position of privilege and power, to me is utterly unfathomable.”Similarly, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said:  “For decades, the victims and their families have seen powerful men escape responsibility for what they did and what they knew.“It should be a source of deep shame to ministers that the British government is now part of that story.”What’s the impact on the general public?It’s not just MPs who have been furious over this appointment.New research from More in Common reveals the Mandelson scandal has deepened public opinion, that the current government is sleazy.Four in five Brits now think the government is just as sleazy as the last Tory government.Nearly 64% said it was inappropriate to appoint Mandelson in the first place due to his past connections to Epstein.At least 73% believe removing Mandelson was the right decision, but 39% think they acted too slowly.Meanwhile, Starmer’s approval fell for a second week in a row, with only a minority of the public thinks he is decisive or honest.More in Common’s executive director Luke Tryl said the last fortnight has been “the most difficult for the government so far” due to the Mandelson row scandal and Angela Rayner’s resignation.The prime minister’s net approval rating is now at -46 – the lowest More in Common has ever recorded for Starmer – with seven in ten respondents saying he was “out of touch” and three quarters saying the PM is not a good judge of character.A huge 63% believe Starmer is doing a bad job compared to a paltry 17% who still believe he is doing a god job.One thing is clear: the fallout from this scandal is likely to rumble on for quite some time yet.Related...Cabinet Minister Heaps Praise On 'Outstanding' Peter Mandelson Despite Sacking Over Epstein RowPeter Mandelson Has Gone – But Questions About Keir Starmer's Own Future RemainPeter Mandelson Sacked As US Ambassador Over Jeffrey Epstein Row

Comments

Breaking news