Starmer’s Mandelson nightmare never ends. This time, it may cost him his job as U.K. leader

LONDON — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer probably wishes he had never heard the name Peter Mandelson.

Subscribe to read this story ad-free

Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content.

Starmer is once again facing questions about his future. And once again, this is due to his ill-advised decision to appoint a so-called “best friend” of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein to the worst post in British diplomacy – ambassador to the United States.

Two months ago, when he was last imperiled by his appointment at the end of 2024, it was his judgment that was called into question. Enough for some members of his Labor party, including his leader in Scotland, to urge him to step down.

Now he is accused of misleading Parliament about how Mandelson overcame official obstacles to get the job.

If it turns out he did, he will find himself on very thin ice, not least because Starmer has put integrity at the heart of his pitch to the British electorate in the July 2024 election to replace the scandal-plagued Conservatives.

“Starmer presented himself as one who always followed the rules, unlike Boris Johnson, for example, and he came to power promising to ‘drain the swamp,'” said Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London.

“For this reason, the latest revelations about the unholy mess created by Peter Mandelson’s misguided appointment mean that many voters now see him not only as a liar but also as a hypocrite – and hypocrisy is one of the worst sins a British politician can commit,” he added.

The control bomb

On Thursday, The Guardian newspaper revealed that Mandelson was initially denied security clearance for the job from which he was ultimately fired nine months later. This is a problem for Starmer as he told Parliament that “due process” had been followed.

The government stressed that Starmer and other ministers only learned earlier this week that the Foreign Office had made a different overall assessment. The consequences have already led to the resignation of the Foreign Office’s most senior official, Olly Robbins.

Starmer is trying to avoid questions about what he knew or didn’t know about the selection process, which would have involved an assessment of Mandelson’s suitability for the role in light of questions about his finances, his relationships, including that with Epstein, and his personality.

Starmer also faces accusations over whether he actually gave instructions to officials to circumvent concerns about Mandelson, 72.

Starmer said he was “absolutely furious” at being kept in the dark, calling it “staggering” and “unforgivable”. He will make a statement to Parliament on Monday.

Not yet Mandelson

For all of Starmer’s disastrous personal ratings and Labor’s expected heavy electoral defeats in a series of elections in May, the frenzy around his leadership has subsided. His decision not to directly involve the UK in the Iran war echoed the public mood.

Mandelson was a high-risk appointment, given that he had twice resigned from Labor governments over financial or ethical missteps at the turn of the century, and his acquaintance with Epstein, who died in prison in 2019.

The calculation Starmer apparently made was clear: the risk was worth it, as Mandelson’s lobbying skills and previous business expertise would help persuade the Trump administration to spare the UK some of the most onerous tariffs.

It seemed to work, but in September 2025 the narrative changed after the release of emails showing that Mandelson had supported Epstein even when he faced prison for sex offenses. Although uncomfortable, Starmer hoped his decision to fire Mandelson would resolve the problem.

However, the release of millions of pages of Epstein-related documents by the U.S. Department of Justice in January put an end to that. Starmer’s political judgment was called into question after emails contained in the so-called Epstein files suggested that when Mandelson was a member of the Labor government, in 2009-10, he passed sensitive – and potentially market-moving – government information to the disgraced financier.

Starmer has repeatedly apologized to the British public and to victims of Epstein’s sex trafficking for believing what he called “Mandelson’s lies.”

British police then launched a criminal investigation and raided Mandelson’s two homes in London and the west of England. Mandelson was arrested on February 23 on suspicion of misconduct in public office. He was released on bail the next morning after more than nine hours of interrogation. He has denied any wrongdoing and does not face allegations of sexual misconduct.

Mandelson’s nightmare will continue

Starmer would have hoped that his composure in the crisis over Iran would help contain any speculation about the leadership, even in the event of an anticipated defeat for his party in May’s election, Britain’s equivalent of the US midterms.

This is wishful thinking.

“This scandal is not over,” said Kemi Badenoch, leader of the main opposition Conservative Party. “He no longer has people to fire, he no longer has places to hide, he no longer has authority. The responsibility falls on him. His position is untenable and he must go.”

The real goal is to find out what Labor lawmakers think.

On Monday, Starmer will assess the mood when he makes his statement. So far, few in his party have said he should leave. If other Labor lawmakers poked their heads above the parapet after a weekend of campaigning in their local constituencies, he could be in big trouble.

Trust in a leader can evaporate in an instant. Just ask Boris Johnson, who was elected with a large majority in 2019 and resigned as prime minister and lawmaker three years later after a series of scandals.