Any association with Jeffrey Epstein was obviously toxic and it reflects poorly on Keir Starmer’s judgment that he didn’t anticipate the risk
A
s UK ambassador to Washington, Peter Mandelson was obviously a risky appointment. There was never any doubt that the former cabinet minister, European commissioner and international business lobbyist would be a skilled operator. The danger came from another of his reliable traits – attracting attention for the wrong reasons.
Sure enough, little over six months into the role, Lord Mandelson’s position became untenable. Sir Keir Starmer had stood by him when links to Jeffrey Epstein first resurfaced – extraordinary given the billionaire financier’s status as a convicted paedophile. The position changed with the publication of evidence showing that Lord Mandelson reaffirmed the friendship even after Epstein’s conviction, expressing solidarity and urging him to seek early release.
The government says that correspondence, previously unknown to the prime minister, was “materially different” to information available when Lord Mandelson was sent to Washington. While that may be true, the distinction is unlikely to settle questions about Sir Keir’s judgment in this affair. Any association with Epstein – who died in a US prison in 2019 – was toxic. Yet the prime minister was still expressing confidence in Lord Mandelson earlier this week, when it was known that he had once described the financier as his “best pal” in a book of birthday greetings.
