Full story
Mandelson files and fallout
Britain’s political crisis deepened after a new trove of Mandelson files was released on Monday, detailing the appointment of Peter Mandelson as U.K. ambassador to the United States at the start of U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term.
“Starmer rejects calls to resign over Mandelson appointment as pressure builds Starmer rejects calls to resign over Mandelson appointment as pressure builds LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Friday resisted demands he resign over revelations that his scandal-tainted pick for U”
The documents include a note from Mandelson to then Foreign Secretary David Lammy in November 2024 pledging that the government would “never regret” giving him the post, a pledge that the files say was “dramatically proven wrong within months.”
Reuters and other outlets tied the controversy to Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s decision to appoint Mandelson despite security vetting issues, with the files describing officials discussing Mandelson’s security vetting and National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell calling it “weirdly rushed.”
The AP reported Starmer resisted calls to resign, saying he was not informed that the Foreign Office had overruled security officials’ early-2025 recommendation not to give Mandelson the job, while the top Foreign Office civil servant Olly Robbins resigned.
In the same dispute, Alex Burghart of the opposition Conservative Party said the decision to appoint Mandelson “is a failure that will define this prime minister’s premiership,” as Starmer faced mounting pressure over the ambassador appointment.
Starmer’s fury and resignations
Keir Starmer told reporters from Paris that he was “furieux” he had not been informed that Peter Mandelson had received an unfavorable assessment from the security background-check service before his nomination.
In the AP’s account, Starmer said he was “absolutely furious” that he had been kept in the dark, and he said he would “set out all the relevant facts in true transparency” to Parliament on Monday.
The AP also reported that opposition leaders challenged Starmer’s claim of ignorance, with Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch telling the BBC that the prime minister’s explanation was “completely preposterous,” and that “All roads lead to a resignation.”
The BBC reported that Morgan McSweeney, who resigned in February over the advice, told MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee that after fresh revelations about Mandelson’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein emerged, it “dawned” on him that he had not given the “full truth” about their friendship.
In the BBC’s description of the vetting timeline, McSweeney said in his evidence that in-depth security vetting was not carried out until after Mandelson’s appointment was announced, and he denied that anyone was asked to “skip steps” in the process.
What’s at stake next
The political stakes are now tied to Parliament’s scrutiny and the next steps in the Mandelson affair, after Starmer acknowledged a “serious mistake” in recommending the appointment and apologized to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein.
“Le Premier ministre britannique Keir Starmer s'est dit vendredi 17 avril "furieux" de ne pas avoir été informé que Peter Mandelson avait reçu un avis défavorable du service chargé de contrôler ses antécédents avant de le nommer ambassadeur aux États-Unis”
The BBC said Starmer’s admission came after it emerged Mandelson had failed in-depth security vetting conducted before his appointment in early 2025, and it reported that Starmer told parliament Monday, “I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson.”
Le Monde reported that Starmer said “At the heart of all this there is a mistake of judgment on my part,” and it described how the affair resurfaced after The Guardian revealed the Foreign Office had granted security clearance in January 2025 despite a negative opinion from the vetting service.
The AP said Starmer’s job is in peril and that the Foreign Office’s top official Olly Robbins took the fall for the decision and resigned, while the Lib Dems asked the prime minister’s ethics adviser to investigate whether Starmer broke the government code of conduct.
As the crisis continues, the AP reported that Starmer said he would set out facts to Parliament on Monday, while opposition figures including Ed Davey said Starmer “must go” if he misled Parliament and lied to the British public.
