Peter Mandelson - Epstein . Should Starmer sack him?

And it was Mandelson who was sacked in/resigned in 1998 for not declaring interest free loan from Geoffrey Robinson; later Robinson said Mandelson had lied to Parliament and both lost their jobs.
2001 Resigned second time for allegations of attempting to influence passport application of rich Indian businessman under investigation by Indian Government.
As UK's European Commissioner there was a conflict of loyalties over a E.U.pension he received2004.
2009 given title and entered House of Lords.
2011 intensive lobbying campaign from Universal Music Group, approved 2 months before public consultation completed.
2021 Advising Starmer against Corbyn.
2024 appointed Ambassador to USA.
2025 sacked from post due to connection and support for Epstein involving negotiating a business deal after his conviction and disgrace.

No-one is much concerned about his sexuality; it is his unsavoury dealings using his position and influence throughout his political life for financial gain.

Not much concerned about his sexuality? Why any concern

Anniebach, as I acknowledged upthread, I saw the potential benefits of the appointment as ambassador. Mandelson’s undoubted dark arts and ability to engage with people seen as a possible advantage in today’s Whitehouse. I’d seen photographs of him with Epstein along with Trump, Clinton and other influential rich people. I assumed due diligence meant he’d been cleared by security services

I haven’t forgotten the positves, or negatives that go with Mandelson’s contribution to the Labour Party

I haven’t forgotten the life long damage Epstein caused to hundreds of girls and women. I knew Mandelson must be sacked when I heard him telling a journalist that as a gay man, with his partner, staying at Epstein’s house he failed to see concerns about the girls. I’m paraphrasing but it’s now been widely reported. Subsequently, Mandelson’s refusal to see Epstein’s admission to soliciting a girl if 14 for sex as wrong, to email advice and continue to support and develop friendship with a convicted sex offender has been made public.

Mandelson’s apology to the victims is meaningless. What was happening under his nose was similar to our so called grooming gangs, just a bit more upmarket

Iam I have not said he shouldn’t be sacked, I spoke of the use of ‘Mandy’, his letters to Epstein troubles me much, something unknown

Iam64

Several years ago, I watched a documentary produced by James Patterson the author, called Filthy Rich
Patterson was a neighbour of Epstein in Palm Beach. He became concerned about the number of under age girls coming and going from Epstein’s house. This was instrumental in the investigation leading to his conviction

Pity Keir Starmer didn’t watch it

Perhpas he did.

For me now, I have doubts about Sir Kier Starmer.

What astonished me about Mandelson's appointment as Ambassador seven months ago was the fact that, publicly disgraced twice for inappropriate conduct, he should consider himself suitable for such a high-ranking appointment, let alone Starmer and Morgan McSweeny. It seems that they chose him because they thought he would be able to work well with Trump; his own lack of morality counting for nothing. But it has come back to bite them.

The same applies to Lucy Powell, disgraced for unpleasant comments in the House, sacked from her post, immediately applies for one of the highest. appointments in the Labour party.
A complete lack of shame, particularly in view of Labour's continuous attack on Conservative values and their claiming of the moral high ground.
Labour is a democratically elected government with a large majority and four years to go; their disastrous first year and the infighting and factions developing within its ranks which so damaged the Conservatives does not bode well for their future and that of the country.

A complete lack of shame, particularly in view of Labour's continuous attack on Conservative values and their claiming of the moral high ground.

I'm inclined to agree eazybee
It really is quite astonishing; we were expecting less sleaze, more decent values and more concern for ordinary citizens but instead it's just a continuation of the political scandals we had become accustomed to over the past few years.

Keir Starmer and David Lammy were both made aware of Mandelson's dubious past but still appointed him in a key role.
I wonder how many people would get an important job in other walks of life with a history like his.
I didn't vote labour but hoped for better.

This month we have had the trio of Putin, Jinping and Ung and now Epstein, Trump and Mandelson.
All thoroughly despicable excuses for men.

I didn't vote for Labour because I suspected they would mess up an already messed up country even more but hell's bells, they have outdone themselves and we're only just into their second year.

Quote AGAA4 Fri 12-Sept-25 11:28:35
Keir Starmer and David Lammy were both made aware of Mandelson's dubious past but still appointed him in a key role.
I wonder how many people would get an important job in other walks of life with a history like his.
I didn't vote labour but hoped for better.

Which part of his past ?

Anniebach

Quote AGAA4 Fri 12-Sept-25 11:28:35
Keir Starmer and David Lammy were both made aware of Mandelson's dubious past but still appointed him in a key role.
I wonder how many people would get an important job in other walks of life with a history like his.
I didn't vote labour but hoped for better.

Which part of his past ?

Which part of his past ?

Parts, not part.

He has twice been sacked from Ministerial posts.
He failed to declare a loan for a house from a fellow MP and was sacked as Northern Ireland Secretary.
Helping a billionaire obtain a British passport.

Really,

In light of Mandelson’s close relationship with Epstein, isn’t an investigation in order? Or is that too much to ask seeing as the man must have the goods on several high ranking individuals here and in the US.
I personally feel very disturbed by how chummy he was with Epstein, obviously going to his holiday villa as well as his home and certainly witnessing what was going on there. Then again I believe Bill Clinton was also once a guest of Epstein.
These men make me feel sick to my stomach.

Babs03 what kind of investigation? We know Trump, Clinton, and many other powerful men were regular fliers on the Lolitaplane
Trump is Potus despit3 that and other sex scandals.

Isn’t it interesting, the only lead player in jail is a woman

Karen Pierce was doing well in the role before Mandelson soanother unwise choice by Starmer. At this rate we will have a GE long before the 4 years are up.

I based my disapproval of Mandelson's appointment on his behaviour while in British Government and his dubious financial dealings; I had no idea of his close relationship with Epstein, which seems far worse than Prince Andrew's connection. Yet it appears he is fighting back against his dismissal and is planning to return to the House of Lords.
What IS Starmer doing? What else is going to emerge?

Quote eazybee Fri 12-Sept-25 13:35:09
I based my disapproval of Mandelson's appointment on his behaviour while in British Government and his dubious financial dealings; I had no idea of his close relationship with Epstein, which seems far worse than Prince Andrew's connection. Yet it appears he is fighting back against his dismissal and is planning to return to the House of Lords.
What IS Starmer doing? What else is going to emerge?

Read the new book on Andrew

I see no need to even consider whether Prince Andrew or Mandelson has the closer relationship with Epstein. Both showed us who they are by continuing the share homes and holidays with Epstein, after his conviction for soliciting a 14 year old girl for prostitution.

It is time that legislation was passed to prevent those with criminal convictions and/or dubious morals to be barred from continuing to sit in the Lords. Jeffrey Archer was enough - do we have to now watch PM making decisions that affect us all, when we know exactly what he is?

Anniebach, Andrew has been banned from all public life.
Mandelson is apparently to resume his seat in the House of Lords, as part of the Government.

Questions of morality, what level, who would decide ?

Oh they shouldn’t have someone like him in the H of L. What sort of an example does that set ?

Quote Anniebach Fri 12-Sept-25 13:56:15
Questions of morality, what level, who would decide ?
Add comment | Report | Private message | Quote nanna8 Fri 12-Sept-25 14:25:34
Oh they shouldn’t have someone like him in the H of L. What sort of an example does that set ?

Who to decide on levels of morality?

Why do you argue about everything anniebach? I accept that there are certain issues on which the degree of transgression might be into account. But surely a man glorifying and accepting the hospitality of someone who has used vulnerable girls in order to build his sordid empire and pleasure his disgusting friends, should not be given a plum job representing our country? Not to forget that Mandelson had previously been involved in some shady dealings and had had to resign.

How is it that these people get to lie low for a few years and then appear back on the scene, eg Jeffrey Archer and Liam Fox. Jeffrey Archer in particular was sent to prison for perjury.

Well we kind of have to have some agreement on morality or anything would be OK.