Politics Home | Morgan McSweeney Says Mandelson’s Friendship With Epstein Was “Knife Through My Soul”

Morgan McSweeney appeared before MPs in parliament on Tuesday

4 min read21 min

Speaking on Tuesday, Morgan McSweeney said he initially believed that Mandelson was telling the truth about the extent of his relationship with the paedophile financier ahead of being appointed UK ambassador to the US, but then realised in September 2025 that he “didn’t get the full truth”.

It was in September when Bloomberg published correspondence between the pair that further evidenced the depth of their friendship.

“The nature of the relationship that I understood he had with Epstein was not a close friendship,” said McSweeney, giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

“How I understood it at the time was a passing acquaintance that he regretted having, and that he apologised for.”

He added: “What has emerged since then was way, way, way worse than I had expected at the time.

“And it was when I saw the pictures, when I saw the [Bloomberg revelations] in September 2025, I have to say it was like a knife through my soul.”

He told the committee that he regrets not asking the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team (PET) to probe Mandelson’s appointment more extensively before he was appointed as US ambassador. 

“When I look back on it, I certainly think it would have been much, much better if I’d asked PET  to ask those follow-up questions,” he said.

“My thinking at the time was, if I put follow-up questions to him in writing, and that if a senior member of staff did that, that he would feel more obligated to give the truth and the full truth.”

He also insisted that there was no “improper” pressure put on the Foreign Office by Downing Street while he was there to formalise Mandelson’s appointment.

“There’s a world of difference between saying we want to go quicker and saying we want to be reckless. One is proper. We want things done quickly. The other is wholly improper.

“Nobody in No in 10 ever thought it would be appropriate to skip steps,” he said.

In a rare public appearance, McSweeney gave evidence to the Emily Thornberry-led committee as part of its look at the decision by Prime Minister Keir Starmer to appoint Mandelson as the UK’s most senior diplomat in Washington.

McSweeney, a close ally of Starmer, resigned from his Downing Street role in February amid growing pressure over the decision to appoint the peer despite his links to Epstein.

His appearance also comes ahead of a House of Commons vote later on Tuesday on referring the Prime Minister to the Privileges Committee on the question of whether he has misled Parliament about the process by which Mandelson was appointed.

Starmer has apologised for the original decision to appoint Mandelson but insists that due process was followed throughout the process. 

Appearing before the committee earlier this morning, Sir Philip Barton, the former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office, said No 10 had shown an “uninterested” attitude towards Mandelson’s security vetting.

In his opening statement, McSweeney referenced the victims and survivors connected to Epstein’s crimes and apologised to them, adding that they were often forgotten in the middle of political stories and drama. 

“Women and girls were abused, exploited and scarred. They deserved protection then, and they deserve to be remembered now. I am sorry for any part this controversy has played in causing further hurt or distress,” he told MPs. 

He admitted that recommending Mandelson’s appointment was a “serious error of judgement”.

“I advised the Prime Minister in support of that appointment, and I was wrong to do so.”

McSweeney argued that, ultimately, the primary problem in his appointment was that Mandelson withheld key information from Starmer about his relationship with Epstein.

He denied the suggestion that the former cabinet minister was a “hero” and “mentor” to him, explaining that he felt Mandelson’s experience as an EU commissioner made him particularly suited to the task of helping secure a post-Brexit trade deal with the US.

McSweeney also said Mandelson probably would not have been appointed to the role if President Trump had lost the election to Democratic candidate Kamala Harris in November 2024, and revealed that the two leading candidates for the role were Mandelson and George Osborne, the former Tory chancellor. 

McSweeney also sought to play down the significance of Mandelson’s influence in the Labour government.

While he admitted that he was in Downing Street during the September cabinet reshuffle and texting him his thoughts, he did not respond, and none of his suggestions ended up happening.

Text messages between the pair will soon be released in the next tranche of files as part of a separate investigation into the Mandelson appointment.