Independent readers have been discussing the growing pressure on Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership after his decision to appoint Lord Peter Mandelson as US ambassador, despite his links to Jeffrey Epstein.
Much of the debate focused on the dramatic vote in the Commons over the release of sensitive vetting documents relating to Mandelson.
Angela Rayner shocked observers by siding with the Tories, forcing Starmer into a humiliating U-turn and calling his judgement and integrity into question.
Readers criticised Labour MPs for infighting instead of focusing on government priorities, and noted Starmer’s repeated U-turns, the government’s perceived indecision, and a declining public trust.
Underlying the discussion was concern for Labour’s future: readers warned that without decisive action, the party’s credibility and Starmer’s political survival could be at serious risk in the coming weeks.
Here’s what you had to say:
Labour MPs have lost their minds
I truly think Labour MPs have lost their minds over this. Epstein was abominable, and Mandelson's association with him was sleazy, to say the least, but he died in 2019, so this friendship wasn't a blackmail risk (the usual reason for failing advanced vetting).
The substantive allegations about collusion with Epstein against his own government are very serious, but they are 15 years old and now in the hands of the police. He was sacked as soon as the allegations came to light, has resigned from the House of Lords, and may well face charges.
If MPs are interested in justice, they should let the police investigation run its course instead of succumbing to moral hysteria. In reality, I think this is more about a determined effort to oust Starmer, and Mandelson's links with Epstein are only an excuse for some dirty politics as the left of the party seeks to grab control. It's unbelievably stupid, because what voters want is a focus on government, not another party intent on civil war.
Starmer thought he knew better
Starmer is not under pressure because of questions being asked now, or even questions he didn't ask Mandelson. No, the reason he's under pressure is that he ignored the questions that were asked about Mandelson before he was even appointed. That is the point when he thought he knew better. That is the point he put the interests of his backers before the interests of the country. And that's why he should resign.
Mandelson was high risk, low reward
Given his history, Mandelson would appear to be an odd choice – high risk, low reward. I do recall discussions at the time about his contacts and influence in the USA, particularly with people close to Trump, being why.
So sure, some level of "I told you so" criticism is warranted.
But this is just getting ridiculous. People are acting like Starmer knew the contents of the Epstein files when making the appointment.
Starmer’s leadership is failing
Under Starmer’s leadership, Labour promised change.
Escalating the Tory era of decay, poverty and lawlessness, in direct proportion to declining living standards, employment, and opportunities – especially for the young – is NOT change.
Vacillation, with U-turns almost weekly, is NOT change; merely an extension of 14 years of Tory chaos.
There is still time, but trust is running out – fast.
Labour needs a new leader
The Labour MPs are on a sinking ship with Starmer as PM, and he has to go. If he's kept in place as PM, then they will lose their parliamentary seats in the next general election, as he is a disaster. They need to replace him with someone who can win votes in the next general election, and that person is not the useless Wes Streeting. That man cannot run the NHS, let alone a country.
They need someone like Angela Rayner, who can wipe that smug smile off Farage’s face, with him going about like the next Prime Minister in a general election. She was a good Deputy Prime Minister and would be more popular than Starmer or Wes Streeting. If she is PM, she can rebuild trust in the Labour Party and bring back the Labour voters put off by Starmer. Labour need a strong PM who can make it harder for Farage to think he will become PM, which would be another disaster for the UK.
Rayner, Reeves and market influence
If Starmer is replaced by Rayner, Reeves will certainly go, and with her any sense that the government is committed to fiscal responsibility.
Whatever else you say about the last budget, it calmed the markets compared to the dire expectations that were in place before it. It also threw a lifeline to Starmer, just when he needed it. The budget was well received by Labour backbenchers, ticking many of the boxes on their wish list.
However, the monster of unpredictability and uncertainty has resurfaced.
Whether you like it or not, the markets, and with them long-term gilt yields and interest rates, exert a baleful and, many would say, unwelcome influence on government policy, thanks to the level of the UK's national debt, as Liz Truss found out to her cost.
If there is going to be a leadership race, with Andy Burnham well and truly out of the contest, it most likely comes down to a choice between Wes Streeting and Angela Rayner, and, of course, Sir Keir Starmer, unless he gives up the fight.
It's not clear whether Streeting would back Reeves, or indeed vice versa, but one thing is for sure: Rayner would want another chancellor, and who would that be?
So, Streeting would have powerful backing, and though he is perhaps not as popular with the rank and file as Rayner, he is bright, would rise to the challenge, and with his excellent communication skills would be a serious challenger.
Mandelson, McSweeney and Starmer
It is well known that Morgan McSweeney is a protégé of Mandelson. He was a key proponent for appointing Mandelson to the US embassy.
Keir Starmer owes a debt of gratitude to McSweeney for first paving the way to win Labour Party leadership and then to PM at the general election.
Apparently, the genius of McSweeney was that Starmer was presented as a Corbynite for leadership and as a Blairite in the 2024 poll.
So it is no surprise that Starmer is aimless, gutless, and prone to gaffes. It is also not surprising that Mandelson got the job he craved. We can only imagine the Mandelson–McSweeney exchange of communications to wheedle the appointment and manipulate Starmer. Mandelson will have his comeuppance for his black arts; about time too. Starmer may meet his fate, and McSweeney hopefully will be surplus to requirements.
Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.
Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up
Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment, click here
Starmer cannot survive as prime minister without his right-hand man
Starmer apologises over Mandelson-Epstein scandal amid calls to resign - live
UK leader apologizes to victims of Epstein for giving Peter Mandelson an ambassador job
Starmer says he did not know ‘depth and darkness’ of Mandelson’s Epstein ties
Will Starmer resign over Mandelson-Epstein scandal and who could replace him?
Could Labour lose Gorton and Denton? Here’s what the polls say
