Minister Lashes Out As Scrutiny Over Mandelson Appointment Grows

Steve Reed could not hide his frustration this morning as he was cornered over Keir Starmer’s controversial decision to appoint Peter Mandelson to be US ambassador despite his Jeffrey Epstein links.

New documents from the US Congress released at the weekend revealed Mandelson’s extensive friendship with the late convicted sex offender continued long after Epstein served a prison sentence.

While Starmer already sacked Mandelson over their connection back in September – when the first few Epstein files were released – the new set of files raises further questions about why he was ever hired in the first place.

The prime minister also admitted to MPs on Wednesday that he knew about their friendship when he hired Mandelson to be the British dispatch in Washington in February last year.

Housing, communities and local government secretary Steve Reed was put on the spot over just why the then-Labour peer got the plum job on Thursday morning.

Good Morning Britain presenter, Richard Madeley, asked: “Wasn’t enough already known to comprehensively disbar him from such an important job?”

Reed replied: “It’s easy, isn’t it, with hindsight, when you do know the truth to look back at the time –”

Madeley tried to cut in, but Reed angrily hit back: “You’re asking me questions but you’re not actually letting me answer.

“What’s the point in asking me a question if you won’t let me answer?

“You’re not listening to what I am saying. If I haven’t even answered it, how do you know I’ve misinterpreted [the question]?”

Madeley asked again if the information that was already in the public domain about his Epstein ties was enough to stop Mandelson getting the plum job.

“No, it wasn’t,” Reed said. “I know you’re saying that because you’ve got the benefit of hindsight.

“There was a process that was gone through, Mandelson lied, the process included security forces, nothing additional was thrown up at the time to make it clear that Mandelson was lying and so he was appointed. Everyone regrets that now, of course.

“As soon as the truth came to light with that first release of files from the United States months ago, the prime minister took immediate and dismissive action, phoned him up at 5am in the morning and sacked him on the spot.”

He said further information pushed Starmer to take more action, including speaking to the King to remove Mandelson from the privy council and strip him of his title.

Co-host Susanna Reid cut in: “I am really confused by what you are saying. I know you are confused by our questions. But I am confused by what you are telling us.

“Because the Financial Times reported in 2023 about the relationship between Lord Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein.

“That reporter told Keir Starmer that at a press conference in 2024. You’re saying it was new information. It wasn’t. It was in the public domain and on the record.”

Flustered, Reed replied: “No, what I’m saying Susanna is the vetting process said his relationship with Epstein had ended long ago and had been next to nothing in any case.

“The vetting process did not show that this was a lie.”

Reid cut in again: “Despite the fact it was reported, it was put to Keir Starmer, it was a matter of public record –”

Reed claimed: “Lots of things are reported which aren’t true!”

She continued: ”– Instead of that being a matter of public record, the vetting process was simply to ask Lord Mandelson to ask if that was true and rely on Lord Mandelson to say it wasn’t true?”

“No. That is not what it was,” the minister said. “I just said, didn’t I? I said the security forces were involved in vetting as well and that threw up nothing of additional concern.”

Reid said: “What does that say about our security services and the vetting process?”

“It shows the vetting process was not good enough and that’s one of the things we need to look at,” he said, suggesting that system has been in place since before this Labour government were elected.

He also claimed Starmer took a decision to appoint the new ambassador “without knowing Mandelson was lying”.

“We can’t legislate against liars lying, what you can judge somebody by is what can you do when the liar is exposed,” Reed said.

Mandelson quit the Labour Party on Sunday and stepped down from the House of Lords on Wednesday.

The Metropolitan Police have since launched a criminal investigation over concerns Mandelson passed confidential information onto Epstein when he was a cabinet minister.