Peter Mandelson - Epstein . Should Starmer sack him?

Of course he should go. Far worse than Angela Rayner. Don’t they do a proper check on these people ?

According to Keir Starmer, due process was followed before Mandelson was appointed. I seem to recall I defended the appointment, despite concerns about Mandelson’s integrity. I could see his dubious, Machiavellian personality being useful with the Trump Whitehouse. I was wrong because I’d forgotten the extent of his relationship with Epstein.

Mi6 will have known the extent of friendship, the continued contacts despite Epstein pleading guilty to procuring sex from 14 year old girls. It must have been obvious this alone would inevitably be used at some stage. Such an easy way to humiliate Starmer, to undermine his commitment to protecting the safety of women and girls

Iam64 I think Peter Mandelson’s position is untenable.

The emails that have already come out are damning in themselves, PM said in the uTube interview with Harry Doles that there are more to come

Best he goes of his own accord as opposed to continuing and damaging the Labour Party and Sir Starmer.

Doles should be Coles 🤷‍♀️

We are (not for the first time) in complete agreement GrannyGravy. Mandelson must go, his position is untenable. I’m so cross, I’d like to see Starmer sack him. How ever he goes, it must be without further delay.

Surely you would know to meet him that he was a sleazebag?

Unquestionably Mandelson must go. We need to rid Government of these sleazy people. ( that’s being polite).
Whilst this is an issue and those like it, they are distracting from the real job of governing the country.

We have many thousands of people in this Country who hold a security clearance based on positive vetting. Part of the vetting process is full disclosure of one’s past - however murky that might be. Why - because the vetting authorities want to be sure as they can be that nothing is hidden from them which if it emerged covertly could be used to advantage by a third party. I would be surprised if non-disclosure was an issue in this case.

To my mind the bigger issue is the judgement of the man that gave the job to one of his Labour mates despite his previous history in Government. The PM must have realised that the issue of Epstein was very raw in the American psyche. I would also question the judgement of Mandelson who must have known what could emerge and how damaging it might be: accepting the post was pure vanity.

If the PM doesn’t sack Mandelson then yet again he will show how poor his political judgement is. I don’t buy into the argument that Mandelson is needed in Washington: as a Country we have very good ambassadorial material. The PM has made it very that every decision he makes has an element of ‘what will POTUS think or do’ in it. He is reluctant to criticise POTUS publicly even though he must know that many of Trump’s decisions are very questionable. This is not what good leadership is all about. Sadly, the PM has hitched his cart to the POTUS horse now for over a year: it will be difficult to get out of this situation without a lot of upset.

All that said, the PM needs to remove this man from his post. Has he got the resolve to do it: time will tell.

If he was an honourable man he would resign.

But honour seems to be lacking these days.

Casdon

This is just my own theory, but I think he will go after Trump’s state visit next week. Practically, as he will be involved in that, it would be difficult for him to go before then because of the significance of the visit and the potential slight to Trump.

That’s exactly what I think too.

Mandelson should go, his excuses for supporting Epstein even after he was arrested are the biggest load of baloney I have ever heard.
If he doesn’t resign Starmer should sack him.
A very unpleasant individual even before this came to light.

A foolish appointment, apropos of his associations he's always been mired in controversy. Possibly put forward for this role because on the surface he comes across as urbane and a smooth operator. I remember thinking when he was seen hobnobbing with George Osborne on some millionaire or oligarch's yacht "why is he even Labour? completely unrepresentative of their ideals"

I am beginning to doubt that Kier Starmer is "foolish".
I am beginning to think he may be something else entirely.
Quite what, I dont know.

Yes.

Gone

Oops! Mandelson gets his P45........

Thank goodness.

I hope he is kept out of Labour's plans for ever.

Thank goodness.

Mandelson always gave me the heebeejeebies. However, yes, he has to go.

Mandelson has faced several scandals and been sacked from the cabinet before, so even without this latest outrage Starmer should have seen the writing on the wall.
Not sure why the man was chosen, possibly because he was the only one slimy enough to deal with Trump?
Seems that in politics some cheat on their CV but even when a CV isn’t needed because the person is so notorious they’re reputation goes before them they are still given the job.
Politics is really hitting an all time low.

As Maya Angelou said: when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.
It’s not as if he didn’t leave any clues as what a deceitful slimy creep he is.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/10/a-banya-with-a-billionaire-undeclared-loans-and-pure-poison-the-many-scandals-of-peter-mandelson

It is bothering me a lot that Sir Kier Starmer didnt have the same thoughts as just about every poster on here.

Surely we have a bigger pool of better candidates for positions in government.
It seems that most governments in the UK recently regardless of which side of the divide they come from, are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Quote fancythat Thu 11-Sept-25 11:06:52
It is bothering me a lot that Sir Kier Starmer didnt have the same thoughts as just about every poster on here.

He didn’t jump when media said ‘jump’

The correct decision 👍🏻