Hello and welcome to Friday’s edition of our UK politics blog.
To start, I want to take you back to what feels like another era… July 2024.
Keir Starmer’s message to the British people during the last election cycle was pretty simple: Labour were the grown-ups in Parliament and were the only party who could be trusted to govern the country.
The campaign could be summed up in one persistently repeated sentence: “Only a Labour government can break this cycle and stop the chaos.”
And yet, once again, the prime minister has faced his worst week in office. Anger has continued to grow, with the party unable to stay on message. Labour MPs feel this latest incident is a problem of his own making, given he chose to appoint the so-called “Prince of Darkness” Peter Mandelson as US ambassador.
But his MPs are divided over how to move on. So far No 10 has held out calls to sack Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, who pushed for Mandelson’s appointment back in 2024.
That won’t stop the outrage though. Speaking on the Today programme, Labour MP Simon Opher said there needs to be a “clearout” of advisers in number 10, with a specific shout-out for McSweeney to leave.
“There’s a lot of anger amongst Labour MPs, because really we want to, I mean, yesterday, I want to be talking about the cancer care plan, not about Peter Mandelson,” he said.
“So I think what we need to do, I think what needs to really happen is that we need to, Keir Starmer needs to change his advisers in Number 10, I think he’s been badly advised, and he’s been really let down, particularly on this decision.
Pressed on whether this meant McSweeney should go, he said: “I think so yes”.
“If my chief of staff had done this I think he would be looking for another job to be honest.”
Number 10 clearly hoped that Starmer’s apology to Epstein’s victims on Thursday would help him regain the trust of the public and his MPs.
He said yesterday that the victims of Epstein had “lived with trauma that most of us could barely comprehend”, and added: “I want to say this. I am sorry – sorry for what was done to you, sorry that so many people with power failed, sorry for having believed Mandelson’s lies and appointed him, and sorry that even now you’re forced to watch this story unfold in public once again.”
His statement centered around the view that Mandelson lied to him about the depth of his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein after his conviction as a sex offender.
That apology hasn’t done what he wanted.
Instead, the criticism has continued from all corners of the party. One of the most stinging lines came from Harriet Harman, a sitting member in the Lords and a former deputy leader of the Labour party, who said the scandal made him look “weak, naive and gullible.”
In an interview with Sky News podcast Electoral Dysfunction, she said: “He’s got to stop blaming Mandelson and saying, ‘he lied to me’.
“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.”
The path forward, in her view, is a “full reset” of his advisers in No 10.
Downing Street has defied calls to remove Keir Starmer’s most senior aide, insisting Morgan McSweeney retains the prime minister’s confidence, as frustration grows over a wait for documents on Peter Mandelson, which some fear could last for weeks.
Amid warnings from Labour backbenchers that McSweeney’s survival would leave Starmer’s position “untenable”, Starmer apologised to victims of Jeffrey Epstein for appointing Mandelson, a close friend of the convicted child sex offender, as US ambassador.
A day after a chaotic Commons deal to release vetting papers over Mandelson’s appointment left many Labour MPs mutinous, there was still fury about the role of McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff.
One Labour MP said: “People want [McSweeney] to go, more than ever before. The current situation is unsustainable.”
Karl Turner, the Hull East MP and a vocal critic of the current No 10 operation, said McSweeney staying would leave the prime minister’s position “untenable”. “I don’t want the PM to go. What I want is the PM to make changes,” he told the BBC.
Downing Street officials pointed to Starmer’s strong defence of McSweeney in the Commons on Wednesday, in which he said nothing had changed. Supporters of the PM are aware that shedding his chief of staff could leave Starmer more directly in the firing line in a future crisis.
Read the full story: No 10 defies calls to sack Morgan McSweeney over Mandelson appointment
Hello and welcome to Friday’s edition of our UK politics blog.
To start, I want to take you back to what feels like another era… July 2024.
Keir Starmer’s message to the British people during the last election cycle was pretty simple: Labour were the grown-ups in Parliament and were the only party who could be trusted to govern the country.
The campaign could be summed up in one persistently repeated sentence: “Only a Labour government can break this cycle and stop the chaos.”
And yet, once again, the prime minister has faced his worst week in office. Anger has continued to grow, with the party unable to stay on message. Labour MPs feel this latest incident is a problem of his own making, given he chose to appoint the so-called “Prince of Darkness” Peter Mandelson as US ambassador.
But his MPs are divided over how to move on. So far No 10 has held out calls to sack Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, who pushed for Mandelson’s appointment back in 2024.
That won’t stop the outrage though. Speaking on the Today programme, Labour MP Simon Opher said there needs to be a “clearout” of advisers in number 10, with a specific shout-out for McSweeney to leave.
“There’s a lot of anger amongst Labour MPs, because really we want to, I mean, yesterday, I want to be talking about the cancer care plan, not about Peter Mandelson,” he said.
“So I think what we need to do, I think what needs to really happen is that we need to, Keir Starmer needs to change his advisers in Number 10, I think he’s been badly advised, and he’s been really let down, particularly on this decision.
Pressed on whether this meant McSweeney should go, he said: “I think so yes”.
“If my chief of staff had done this I think he would be looking for another job to be honest.”
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: theguardian.com
