LONDON – Prime Minister Keir Starmer expressed anger on Friday over not being informed that his former ambassador to the United States had failed security vetting before being handed the job, defending himself from renewed pressure to resign. Starmer, who won the largest majority in modern history for Labour at a national election in 2024, faces new questions over his political judgment, just three weeks before his party is expected to be punished in local elections in England, and regional votes in Scotland and Wales.
Following the resignation of Labour veteran Peter Mandelson as US ambassador over his ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Starmer had managed to win a brief reprieve from his critics after limiting Britain’s role in US President Donald Trump’s and Israel’s war in Iran. However, on Thursday it emerged that Mandelson had failed the security vetting conducted before his appointment as envoy, a fact that Starmer’s team said the prime minister had been unaware of. Starmer’s political foes have questioned how a prime minister could not know and have demanded his resignation.’
Starmer, who was in France on Friday for talks on the Iran crisis, told reporters it was unforgivable that he had not been told about Mandelson having failed security vetting “when I was telling parliament that due process had been followed.” Asked if he would resign, Starmer said he would “set out the relevant facts” on Monday to parliament.
A spokesperson for Starmer told reporters the prime minister had no plans to resign. Downing Street moved swiftly late on Thursday to try to quash the scandal, sacking the Foreign Office’s top official, Olly Robbins. Yet his team’s argument that Starmer did not know until this week key information surrounding an appointment he had promoted in 2024 as a stroke of genius has sparked doubts over whether the prime minister has a proper grip on his government.
