Speaker grants emergency debate on Mandelson as Starmer admits appointment was a mistake

It comes as the Prime Minister admitted he made an error in naming Lord Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US, but insisted he would never have appointed him if he knew the extent of his relationship with infamous paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Sir Keir Starmer sacked Lord Mandelson last week but is under massive pressure over his judgment in appointing the peer, whose friendship with Epstein was public knowledge, in the first place.

A day before sacking Lord Mandelson, Sir Keir stood in the Commons and publicly defended him.

Hours later, an email exchange between Epstein and Lord Mandelson was published, which resulted in his sacking.

The Prime Minister told broadcasters on Monday that Lord Mandelson went through a proper due diligence process before his appointment.

Read more: Top Starmer strategy chief quits over probe into X-rated messages about Diane Abbott

But he added: “Had I known then what I know now, I’d have never appointed him.”

The Prime Minister said he was not satisfied with Lord Mandelson’s responses to questions asked by officials about the correspondence with Epstein.

Emails published by Bloomberg included passages in which Lord Mandelson told Epstein to “fight for early release” shortly before he was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

He is also reported to have told Epstein “I think the world of you” the day before the disgraced financier began his sentence for soliciting prostitution from a minor in June 2008.

Sir Keir was aware when he stood up at Prime Minister’s Questions that further revelations were due about Lord Mandelson, because the then ambassador had acknowledged “very embarrassing” messages would surface.

The Prime Minister also knew the Foreign Office had asked Lord Mandelson questions about them, but he insisted he did not know about the content of the emails – or Lord Mandelson’s response to the official inquiries – until Wednesday night.

Sir Keir said: “What emerged last week were emails, Bloomberg emails which showed that the nature and extent of the relationship that Peter Mandelson had with Epstein was far different to what I had understood to be the position when I appointed him.

“On top of that, what the email showed was he was not only questioning but wanting to challenge the conviction of Epstein at the time that for me, went and cut across the whole approach that I’ve taken on violence against women and girls for many years, and this Government’s approach.

“On top of that, what emerged last week, on Wednesday evening late, were Peter Mandelson’s responses to questions that have been put to him by Government officials. I looked at those responses, and I did not find them at all satisfying.

“And therefore, on the basis of those three things – the nature and extent of the relationship being far different to what I’d understood to be the position at the point of appointment, the questioning and challenging of the conviction, which, as I say, goes to the heart and cuts across what this Government is doing on violence against women and girls and the unsatisfactory nature of responses from Peter Mandelson last week to the inquires made of him by Government officials – I took the decision to remove him.”