With Donald Trump’s UK state visit days away, Mandelson blame game begins

Trump’s state visit is just days away, and the Mandelson scandal blame game has begun.

three hours prior.

Presenter Laura Kuenssberg, Laura Kuenssberg, Sunday.

“What a week. A complete mess. A senior Labour MP is not alone in being shocked by this government’s most recent unforgivable disaster.

The first test of the new senior team in No 10 was how Downing Street responded to the disclosures regarding Lord Mandelson’s friendship with the wealthy paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Putting the prime minister’s face on the calamity by putting him in the middle of Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) with a resolute defense of his man in Washington, the uncharitable opinion is that they failed it by not acting swiftly enough.

They were aware of fresh accusations regarding his connection to Epstein. It appeared that Mandelson would have to go in the same direction.

The prime minister’s defense of another colleague, Angela Rayner, last week happened when, you guessed it, the course of events in Westminster appeared to be set and she would probably have to leave. This makes the situation even more awkward.

In a time when the party was desperately trying to turn the page, it has blown the chance for a speedy autumn reset for Labour and damaged the prime minister’s own authority.

The more lenient defense offered by Sir Keir’s supporters is that he has had to come forward to clean up the mess left by two different people in two different ways.

One source claims that Keir is “frustrated and a bit angry because he is having to deal with the conduct of others, rather than show what he is trying to do.”.

Another says: “He didn’t get the whole truth from the person he hired.”. “.”.

No. 10 does not believe that the harm caused by the past two weeks of farce is restricted to people who are no longer in government.

Additionally, new information about who knew what and when is constantly coming to light as they process the extent of the embarrassment surrounding Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein.

According to sources in Westminster, during the Cabinet Office’s initial screening process prior to Mandelson’s appointment, the prime minister himself reportedly questioned his connections to Epstein.

However, after he was appointed, the Foreign Office checked him out once more.

Where did it all start, then?

The desire to look beyond the conventional diplomatic appointment for their ambassador to the White House, one of the government’s plum jobs, had existed in Sir Keir’s circle even before Labour won the 2024 election.

They had decided that a politician might be the best option after observing how former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was dispatched to Washington.

Mandelson’s trade commissioner experience, extensive network of contacts, and well-respected political acumen quickly made him a great candidate.

Morgan McSweeney, the influential chief of staff under Sir Keir, was excited about Mandelson and thought there were only two strong contenders for the position.

As would be the case with any such candidate, the Cabinet Office was asked to evaluate his suitability for the position before the final decision was made last fall.

Since Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein was already well known at that point, it was clear that those connections would need to be taken into account.

They told me that Mandelson’s relationship with the disgraced millionaire was part of a file that was given to the prime minister by the Cabinet Office’s Propriety and Ethics Team (PET), which is responsible for knowing where the bodies are buried in Whitehall.

According to a No 10 source, Sir Keir had three questions after reading this file that he wanted to ask the peer. The first was: Why had he not severed his ties with Epstein after his initial conviction?

When the financier was incarcerated, why had he stayed at one of Epstein’s homes?

Was he also a “founding citizen” of a charity that Epstein had supported for ocean conservation?

Sir Keir’s chief of staff, McSweeney, sent Mandelson an email with those three questions.

According to Downing Street sources, the peer was “economical with the truth” in his email response to those questions.

According to what is known, Mandelson told No. 10 that he had not stayed in Epstein’s Manhattan apartment in 2009 while Epstein was incarcerated, and he feels that he was honest and forthright about its association. According to a different source, he informed Downing Street that he had not stayed there.

Epstein informed his private banker that Mandelson would be staying at the property, according to court documents made public in 2023. Despite claims that he had no memory of doing so, Mandelson has never specifically denied or acknowledged that he did.

Notably, during the vetting process, none of those problems—the charity, the potential house stay, or the ongoing friendship—were found. Prior years had seen reports of them.

But Mandelson’s assurances to the prime minister were deemed enough to justify the risk of hiring him.

According to sources, the Foreign Office’s “developed vetting” procedure began as soon as the appointment was made.

The typical procedure for government appointments is contingent upon the nature of the work and the level of sensitivity of the information and materials to be handled.

Due to the two nations’ connections in intelligence, trade, security, and defense, there is hardly a position that requires more trust than the White House ambassador.

According to another senior figure, the DV process, which would have involved an in-person interview that “ought to have been completely forensic, but they must have used the wrong lens,” is what led to the fact that nothing was reported to No 10.

Even in a very high-profile appointment, the results of such a process would not naturally reach Downing Street, unlike the PET file. The DV procedure operates independently.

Furthermore, Downing Street sources maintain that everything proceeded because they were not informed of any issues.

Ultimately, neither of the two procedures that looked into Mandelson’s background—which was known to include interactions with a notoriously wealthy sex offender—seems to have uncovered anything significant, including the now-famous emails that investigative reporters were recently able to track down.

I was informed by a Whitehall insider that it was “staggering – either they skipped the process of any basic due diligence, or they did that process and missed the obvious questions.”.

“Nobody who was involved in the appointment process was concerned enough to verify if all the risks associated with selecting a man who had twice had to resign due to his poor judgment had been identified. Being careless is insufficient. “,”.

This week, the government has stated on several occasions that the fact that the correspondence between Mandelson and Epstein came from an invalid email address was a contributing factor.

However, a senior Whitehall official tells me that if more questions had been asked and forensic background research had been done, those messages could have been found.

The Cabinet Office declined to comment, as did Downing Street.

It appeared that No. 10’s calculated risk of selecting Mandelson was paying off until this past week.

In addition to the fact that the UK had secured its trade agreement, US President Donald Trump seemed to enjoy his company, praising his “beautiful accent” on camera recently in the Oval Office.

It was all about the pomp and circumstance of the state visit. Unlike many other world leaders, Sir Keir seemed to have been able to establish a cordial and productive relationship with the most influential person in the west.

At least some of that can be attributed to the ambassador’s skillful communication and scheming.

The peer’s appearance in the so-called Epstein “birthday book” abruptly interrupted the successful tenure he and No. 10 were enjoying. It includes a cozy message in which Mandelson refers to Epstein as his “best friend” and a picture of the two of them together, with Mandelson dressed in a bathrobe.

Even worse, reporters from the news organization Bloomberg were able to obtain a cache of Epstein’s emails, including correspondence with Mandelson over the course of months and years.

In an effort to foreshadow the story, Mandelson told The Sun that a plethora of contact between the two was going to come to light and called the disclosures “very embarrassing.”. This caused Whitehall to ring with alarm.

According to sources, he had been “dismissive, claiming there was nothing new” in the rumors that surfaced earlier in the week regarding his friendship with Epstein and had not given Downing Street access to the contents of the emails.

However, the government contacted the peer to inquire about the situation by late Tuesday, realizing that more damaging accusations were imminent.

On Wednesday morning, as No 10 was getting ready for the prime minister’s weekly PMQs battle in the Commons and planning the day, Mandelson’s prediction that there would be more to come was first reported.

In a move that now appears foolish, the prime minister publicly defended Lord Mandelson at noon before the government had heard back from him.

However, Mandelson’s responses to PMQs were deemed inadequate by the government.

In Whitehall, a secure room where mobile communications are prohibited, McSweeney, the prime minister’s chief of staff, was called out of a meeting.

It was decided shortly after to request Mandelson’s resignation, according to sources.

In an attempt to “brazen it out,” he refused; according to sources, he continued “telling everyone it would be fine.”.

The impact of losing the ambassador on the US president’s important state visit, which is only a few days away, and the potential legal repercussions of evicting Mandelson were also considerations for No. 10 on Wednesday.

However, the prime minister read the emails in all their graphic splendor after Bloomberg revealed the full scope of those exchanges later on Wednesday night.

I’ve been told that “Keir was furious,” and he and the foreign secretary formally decided on Thursday morning that Labour’s veteran fixer would be fired if he didn’t leave on his own initiative.

What happens next?

Working at his country retreat, Chequers, on Friday, the prime minister was thinking about his conference speech, for which Sir Keir has “picked up the pen” in a more proactive manner than in the past because he knows that he is under tremendous pressure to uplift the atmosphere and demonstrate his value.

Following a dismal first year in office that left many members of the Labour Party depressed, his big conference podium moment was already destined to be a high-wire act.

It’s “fortuitous we are heading to conference and we can grab the mic,” according to an insider, after this hectic two weeks.

I was told by another senior figure: “I don’t see problems that can’t be solved. “.”.

But it might take some time for the clamor to subside in the case of Lord Mandelson. An insider in the party stated, “This isn’t over – No 10 is in total denial.”.

According to another well-known source, the Mandelson scandal “is just another big misstep.”.

McSweeney, the prime minister’s chief of staff, is also causing increasing concern in addition to Sir Keir.

Even though he and the prime minister had doubts about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, it’s clear that he was eager to appoint him.

His attempts to save the US ambassador from his fate this week, however, are disputed by sources.

He allegedly agreed to let Mandelson leave at lunchtime on Wednesday before heading to Brussels for meetings, which is why he was out of the country when the decision to fire him was made.

Powerful staffers are frequently targeted when politicians are in a bad mood.

On the inside, opposition politicians and critics may even seem to take pleasure in finger-pointing.

McSweeney, however, is essential to Sir Keir’s leadership.

“If there’s no Morgan, there’s no Starmer,” a senior Labour official warned, cautioning MPs who were about to accuse him of fault.

One cabinet minister laments the terrible beginning of what should have been a bright new political season, saying: “We have made the right big strategic calls, but there is just no way that we should be in this position after a year.”. “.”.

Others, however, think that there is still hope. Senior figures indicate their fortunes could drastically improve quickly, similar to how Labour’s popularity fell rapidly after winning the election.

Political instability can be both a friend and an enemy to governments.

It’s difficult to see where Labour can find much solace at the moment, though.

The prime minister has a great chance to change the course and increase the party’s confidence, but there is little choice but to press on with what insiders describe as “good announcements” that will be made in the coming weeks.

However, one minister made a joke following a startling two weeks for the government: “I keep thinking maybe I’ll wake up from this detailed dream. “.

“But no, this is the situation as it is, and we must deal with it. Indeed, they do.

Picture courtesy of Ben Pruchnie/Getty Images and Alberto Pezzali/Pool via REUTERS.

BBC InDepth is the go-to app and website for the best analysis, offering in-depth reporting on the most pressing topics of the day along with new viewpoints that challenge preconceptions. We also highlight interesting content from iPlayer and BBC Sounds. By clicking the button below, you can provide us with your thoughts on the InDepth section.