Starmer Confronts Internal Rebellion Over Mandelson Appointment Scandal
Prime Minister Keir Starmer is confronting renewed and intensifying demands from within the Labour Party to dismiss his most senior adviser, Morgan McSweeney, as the government braces for the imminent publication of files concerning the controversial appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador. The political storm has escalated dramatically, with senior figures publicly criticising the Prime Minister's judgement and leadership.
Growing Chorus of Dissent Within Labour Ranks
Simon Opher, the Labour MP for Stroud, became the latest parliamentarian to call for McSweeney's removal, stating unequivocally that the chief of staff should be sacked over his instrumental role in advancing Mandelson's candidacy despite known concerns about his association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Opher's intervention on BBC Radio 4's Today programme represents a significant escalation of internal party discontent.
"Keir Starmer needs to change his advisers in Number 10," Opher declared. "I think he's been badly advised, and he's been really let down, particularly on this decision. I know in politics we really rely on people to cover our backs, our advisers, and I think they patently haven't done this with Peter Mandelson. So we need a bit of a clear out really at No 10."
When pressed specifically about McSweeney's position, Opher responded: "I think so, yes. If my chief of staff had done this I think he would be looking for another job to be honest."
Harman Delivers Damning Assessment of Prime Minister's Conduct
The criticism extended beyond backbenchers, with former Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman delivering a particularly devastating assessment of Starmer's handling of the crisis. Speaking on Sky's Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Harman argued that the Prime Minister's attempts to blame Mandelson for misleading him only compounded the political damage.
"He has got to stop blaming Mandelson and saying 'he lied to me'," Harman asserted. "Because actually he should never have been considering him in the first place. And to say 'he lied to me' makes it look weak and naive and gullible. So it's just completely the wrong thing."
Her comments reflect growing concern among Labour veterans that the scandal has fundamentally undermined Starmer's authority and exposed serious flaws in Downing Street's vetting processes and political judgement.
Revelations from Epstein Files Intensify Pressure
The renewed calls for accountability follow disturbing revelations from the Jeffrey Epstein files in the United States, which have shed new light on the nature of Mandelson's relationship with the disgraced financier. Documents suggest Epstein provided Mandelson with substantial financial transfers, including one payment of $75,000 (approximately £55,000), which Mandelson claims he cannot recall.
More alarmingly, evidence indicates that Mandelson shared sensitive government information with Epstein during his tenure at the heart of Gordon Brown's administration. These disclosures have raised profound questions about why Mandelson was ever considered suitable for the sensitive diplomatic posting in Washington, given what was known about his continued association with Epstein even after the financier's conviction for child sex trafficking.
Downing Street's Contradictory Stance and Document Release
Despite the mounting pressure, Downing Street maintained on Thursday that McSweeney retains the Prime Minister's full confidence. This official position appears increasingly at odds with the growing rebellion within parliamentary party ranks.
Meanwhile, ministers are preparing to surrender electronic communications with Mandelson after Starmer agreed to release documents related to the appointment process. Number 10 claims to have initiated discussions with Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee regarding publication, though the committee has denied such talks have occurred.
Government sources suggest the released files may actually alleviate pressure on Starmer by demonstrating the extent to which Mandelson allegedly deceived officials during vetting procedures. However, many Labour MPs remain sceptical, indicating they will reserve judgement on whether to call for the Prime Minister's resignation until they have examined the documents themselves.
Mixed Ministerial Support Amidst Deepening Crisis
Immigration Minister Mike Tapp offered a measured defence of Starmer on Friday, telling Sky News: "I believe if we stick with Keir Starmer, which we will, then that corner will turn faster and people will start to feel it. But I completely understand the anger and the distress at what's happened with Peter Mandelson's appointment. I completely agree with that, and that's why I'm really pleased to see a genuine, genuine apology from Keir Starmer."
Starmer's apology to Epstein's victims on Thursday, while lengthy and emotionally charged, notably avoided expressing regret for actually appointing Mandelson to the ambassadorial role. This selective remorse has failed to quell the anger among many parliamentarians who believe the fundamental error was the appointment itself, not merely being misled during the process.
As the government awaits the document release, the political atmosphere remains volatile, with the Mandelson scandal threatening to destabilise Starmer's leadership and expose deep divisions within Labour over standards, judgement, and accountability in high office.
