Starmer admits mistake in appointing Mandelson as UK ambassador

Starmer told lawmakers in the House of Commons that “I would not have gone ahead with the appointment” had he known about the security concerns.

He laid blame squarely on Foreign Office officials, saying the fact Mandelson had failed security vetting “could and should have been shared with me before he took up his post.”

Starmer is facing a skeptical audience in Parliament as he tries to to explain why Mandelson became Britain’s ambassador to Washington despite failing security checks — and seemingly without Starmer being told about the concerns.

The revelation has left furious opponents calling for Starmer to quit and uneasy allies wondering what else the nation’s leader didn’t know about.

Starmer repeatedly told lawmakers that “due process” was followed when Mandelson was appointed. He now says he’s “furious” that he wasn’t informed that an intensive vetting process had recommended Mandelson not be given security clearance. The Foreign Office, which oversees diplomatic appointments, cleared him anyway.

Starmer fired the top Foreign Office civil servant, Olly Robbins, within hours of the revelation by The Guardian last week. But allies of Robbins say he would never have been able to share sensitive vetting information with the prime minister.

Robbins is expected to give his own version of events to the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday.

Starmer resists pressure to resign

All the main opposition parties have called on Starmer to step down. Right-of-center Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said in the Mail on Sunday that he had “misled Parliament over Mandelson, misled the country and is taking the public for fools.”

Ed Davey, leader of the opposition Liberal Democrats, said Starmer had “showed catastrophic misjudgment.”

Senior government colleagues have defended the prime minister. Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy said that if Starmer had known about the failed security vetting, “he would never, ever have appointed him ambassador.”

But lawmakers in Starmer’s center-left Labour Party, already anxious about the party’s dire poll ratings, are restive. Starmer has already defused one potential crisis in February, when some Labour lawmakers urged him to resign over the Mandelson appointment.

He could face a new challenge if, as expected, Labour takes a hammering in local and regional elections on May 7, which give voters a chance to pass a midterm verdict on the government.

Warnings about Epstein ties went unheeded

Critics say the Mandelson appointment is more evidence of a failure of judgment by a prime minister who has made repeated missteps since he led Labour to a landslide election victory in July 2024. Starmer has struggled to deliver promised economic growth, repair tattered public services and ease the cost of living, and has been forced into repeated policy U-turns.

He picked Mandelson for one of Britain’s most important diplomatic jobs despite being warned by his staff that Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein, a convicted sex offender who died in prison in 2019, exposed the government to “reputational risk.”

Mandelson’s business links to Russia and China also set off alarm bells. But his expertise as a former European Union trade chief and contacts among global elites were considered assets in dealing with President Donald Trump’s administration.

He lasted less than nine months in the job. Starmer fired Mandelson in September 2025, after evidence emerged that he had lied about the extent of his links to Epstein.

A trove of Epstein-related documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice in January included emails suggesting Mandelson had passed on sensitive, and potentially market-moving, government information to Epstein in 2009, after the global financial crisis.

British police launched a criminal probe and arrested Mandelson in February on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Mandelson has previously denied wrongdoing and hasn’t been charged. He does not face allegations of sexual misconduct.