2 hours ago
2
It’s beginning to feel terminal. Not that there hasn’t been talk of Labour MPs wanting to remove Keir Starmer before. Just that this time there’s the sense of a tipping point being reached. No more second chances. No praying for a miracle that will never come in the May elections. A quantum shift of collective despair.
You can’t escape the irony. Starmer has always prided himself on being Mr Rules. It’s how he got elected. He might be a bit dull and lack charisma, but you can count on him to be reliable. To play by the rules. And now he has been undone by having given the prime Washington job to a man who was the epitome of Mr No Rules. And he had thought he had been so clever by acting out of character to make Peter Mandelson the US ambassador. Many in his cabinet had congratulated him, as had many Tories. A sleazy diplomat for a sleazy president. A match made in heaven.
But what was done cannot be undone. This is one mistake that can’t be put right. The sacking of Mandelson last September was necessary but far too little. Mandy was a binary choice. No redemption on offer. No apologies, or promises to cut the cost of living in the coming year, would do. Starmer had been weighed in the balance by his own party and found wanting. Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin.
There was a look of despair in Starmer’s eyes as he made his way to the podium at the Horntye Park sports club in Hastings. He was there to make yet another attempt to relaunch himself in 2026 – this time to talk about community values – but he knew this would, like all the others, be dead in the water. No one would remember a word of what he said about the Pride in Place initiative. All anyone wanted to hear about was Mandelson. The group of Labour supporters in the room gave the prime minister a sympathetic clap. Like a football crowd giving a minute’s applause in memory of an ex-player who has recently died.
Starmer tried to address the Mandelson situation directly. He, Keir, had come in to politics late. He believed in public service. He wanted to make the country a better place for all. You couldn’t argue with that. Other politicians, such as Peter Mandelson, were just in it for themselves. This would be the first of many times that Keir’s argument collapsed in on itself under the weight of its own contradictions. A form of entropy. Because yes, we all knew that Mandy was that type of politician. He had proved it time and again while in office during the New Labour years. So always the question remained: why did you give him the job?
We moved on to a slightly revisionist history of Mandelson’s appointment. “I had wanted to say this at PMQs yesterday,” Starmer confided. “But I was conscious of not wanting to compromise any future police investigation.” Presumably at some time in the past 24 hours he has decided he’s less bothered about the Old Bill’s inquiries. It was like this, said Keir. Yes, he had known Mandy and Jeffrey Epstein had vaguely known each other at some point, but during the vetting and security clearance procedures, Mandelson had lied through his teeth. And when the extent of their relationship became clear, he had fired him.
Except it just can’t have been anything like that. Because long before Mandy got the job it was common knowledge that he was in contact with Epstein and staying in his flat after the sex offender had been convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution. Which should have been a red flag, disqualification immediately. You could have ended the security clearance then and there. But we’re expected to believe the security services just nodded along and ticked the right boxes when Mandy told them he had never heard of Epstein. Had no idea he was staying in a sex offender’s flat. Imagine his surprise. If this is true, Keir would have been better off getting me or any random person off the street to do the vetting. We could have told him Mandelson had always been a wrong ‘un.
Then we got to the apology. Keir wanted to say sorry to the victims of Epstein. For having been yet another person to let them down. Though he wanted them to know it wasn’t really his fault, as he had been misled himself. Which was fine as far it goes. Certainly better than not apologising. But still a category error. Because all that Starmer had needed to do was to say no to Mandelson. A moral choice. It wasn’t even that hard a decision. But the Establishment had yet again fallen over backwards to accommodate Mandy. Even trying to wangle him the job as chancellor of Oxford University. That’s the way of the world. The right people always looked out for Peter.
The main body of the speech was more of a prayer. A desire to be heard. A plea for forgiveness. Possibly even existence. But some of it rang hollow. Talk of “our values that bind us together” and the “rules that protect those in need”. Remind me. Just how did those values and rules help the victims of Epstein? It had felt very much as if the government had chosen the best interests of the government, until the shit hit the fan.
Inevitably, the questions all focused on Mandelson. The BBC wondered whether the fact he had twice been forced to resign from the cabinet might not have been a clue he was unsuitable. Keir had no answer, yet again trying to claim he had had no idea of the extent of the wrongdoing. Maybe. But surely you had enough. Sky noted the anger in Starmer’s voice. You couldn’t help thinking some of this anger was better directed at himself. This one was on him. He had enough information. We all did. He could have acted differently.
The Guardian’s man read out some quotes from Labour backbenchers about the prime minister’s future. You could almost see the tears in Starmer’s eyes. As if part of him also suspects the game is up. This is his tragedy. At heart he is a good man, but he has screwed up. That’s what you get for dealing with Mandelson. He will always make sure to take others down with him.
