MPs are attempting to force the release of documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as UK ambassador to the United States after a Commons revolt exposed deep fractures inside the Labour Party which left PM Sir Keir Starmer politically weakened.
The government was pushed into a climbdown after Labour backbenchers rebelled against plans to withhold material that could reveal what Downing Street knew about Mandelson’s relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
During a heated Commons session, Starmer claimed he supported publication of the files but insisted he would block the release of any material that might affect national security or diplomatic relations.
That position collapsed as senior Labour figures, led by Angela Rayner, intervened to demand full scrutiny, forcing ministers to agree that disputed documents would be examined by a cross-party parliamentary committee.
Starmer is under intense pressure after police opened a criminal investigation into allegations that Mandelson passed sensitive government information to Epstein.
Mandelson was dismissed as ambassador last year after fresh disclosures about the scale of their relationship.
Emails released by the US Department of Justice show that Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein continued, and intensified, after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
Starmer admitted he was aware of the ongoing relationship when he appointed Mandelson in 2024.
At Prime Minister’s Questions, Starmer attempted to deflect responsibility by blaming Mandelson.
‘He lied repeatedly to my team when asked about his relationship with Epstein before and during his tenure as ambassador. I regret appointing him,’ he told MPs.
‘If I knew then what I know now, he would never have been anywhere near government.’
Those remarks failed to calm criticism. Labour MPs said the admission confirmed that Starmer had signed off the appointment despite clear warnings and was now scrambling to contain the damage.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused the government of attempting to block disclosure.
‘This is not about national security, this is about his job security,’ she said, adding that ministers had been ‘forced’ into releasing information.
‘The Prime Minister signed off this appointment, this was not an accident, it was a choice.’
A Commons debate later ended with MPs backing proposals to release the Mandelson documents without a formal vote.
Anger persisted over the prospect that some papers could still be withheld, with MPs openly accusing the government of a cover up.
Only after last minute interventions from Rayner and other Labour MPs did ministers concede that contested material would be referred to the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament.
The scale of the rebellion, driven from Labour’s own benches, left Starmer’s authority visibly diminished.
Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey described Mandelson’s appointment as a ‘catastrophic misjudgement’ and said there were ‘huge questions to be answered’ by the prime minister.
She said it was now up to Starmer ‘to outline what he’s going to do to restore integrity, and he’s got a job on his hands’.
Barry Gardiner said Starmer tried to ‘duck and hide behind process’ rather than confront the mistake directly.
‘We were squirming. The backbenchers on the Labour benches were just going, oh for God’s sake, get on with it,’ he said.
Asked whether Starmer should step down, Gardiner added: ‘I think he needs to think very hard about what is in the country’s best interest.’
The controversy has been compounded by the police investigation into Mandelson for alleged misconduct in public office.
Emails released in the US suggest he forwarded Epstein an internal Downing Street memo in 2009 discussing potential government asset sales, and later gave advance notice of a 500bn euros EU bailout to stabilise the eurozone.
Other emails indicate Epstein made payments totalling $75,000 to Mandelson in the early 2000s.