Downing Street has been forced to deny allegations of a “cover up” in the release of files related to the appointment of Peter Mandelson after accusations the prime minister misled MPs over the vetting process.
Speaking for the first time since the first tranche of files were published on Wednesday, Sir Keir Starmer took personal responsibility for his “mistake” in appointing Lord Mandelson as his US ambassador and reiterated his apology to Jeffrey Epstein’s victims.
The prime minister is facing fresh questions about his judgment in giving the peer the ambassadorship despite being explicitly warned of a “general reputational risk” because of his relationship with the convicted paedophile.
In his first public appearance since the publication of the documents, Sir Keir told reporters in Northern Ireland: “The release of the information shows what was known.
“That led to further questions being asked. Unfortunately, because of the Metropolitan Police investigation, we can’t release that information yet.
“But that doesn’t take away from the fact that it was me that made a mistake, and it’s me that makes the apology to the victims of Epstein, and I do that.”
The absence of the prime minister’s own comments in the trove of government papers released on Wednesday has also come under scrutiny, raising questions over whether Sir Keir misled MPs when he told them “full due process” had been followed during Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
The Liberal Democrats have urged Sir Keir to refer himself to the ethics adviser for potentially misleading Parliament, suggesting that revelations in the emails were at odds with Sir Keir’s repeated insistence that the process was followed.
It comes after the files showed that national security adviser Jonathan Powell raised concerns over Lord Mandelson’s appointment, saying it had been “weirdly rushed”.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch claimed that “a lot of information is missing” from the files, pointing to an empty box she said Sir Keir was required to fill beneath advice he received in 2024 about the appointment.
No 10 said no notes by Sir Keir were redacted, meaning that the prime minister did not fill out the box which was reserved for his response.
But the PM’s official spokesperson repeatedly insisted that the process was followed and said Downing Street would look at making improvements to both the vetting and due diligence procedures, claiming they are “not up to scratch”.
Asked specifically about the blank box, he told reporters: “I refute the suggestion of a cover up. The government has complied fully. I just don’t accept that it’s the case at all.
“There are a range of different ways in which the prime minister’s senior team responds to advice.”
The spokesperson added: “The prime minister did read the advice, but clearly there are lessons to be learned on the wider appointment processes, and the processes that led up to them.”
Mrs Badenoch earlier told the Press Association: “The comments which Keir Starmer would have put on the box notes – those are the cover notes where you explain what you want to happen – are missing.
“They have been removed. We need the full details of what the prime minister did. There is still a cover up going on.”
The Tory leader also raised alarm over the £75,000 taxpayer-funded payout handed to Lord Mandelson after he was sacked, describing it as “dodgy”.
“If someone has been dishonest and lied, you don’t give them a severance payment,” she said.
Treasury guidance on public sector exits and severance pay says that “departments should not treat special severance as a soft option, e.g. to avoid management action, disciplinary processes, unwelcome publicity or reputational damage.”
But files published on Wednesday show that the Foreign Office, when discussing Lord Mandelson’s payout, warned that the former ambassador “has a high profile which could give rise to reputational damage to the FCDO and HMG were a court or tribunal claim to be pursued.”
But asked about this discrepancy, the prime minister’s spokesperson insisted the payout “was approved by the Treasury in line with standard processes.”
He also noted that the sum was “less than a sixth of” the £547,000 demanded by the Labour veteran.
The spokesperson said: “It was approved by the Treasury in line with standard guidance on severance pay.
“We have been clear that we think Mandelson should pay that money back or donate it to a victim’s charity.
“The objective of officials dealing with this issue was to end Mandelson’s employment swiftly whilst protecting public funds.
“And a settlement was therefore agreed in line with his employment contract and standard Civil Service HR processes, avoiding the risk and high costs of drawn-out legal action and ensuring he was quickly removed from the payroll.”
Lib Dem Cabinet Office spokesperson Lisa Smart said: “The prime minister has not only shown a catastrophic lack of judgment over Mandelson’s appointment, the evidence is mounting that he misled Parliament.
“Keir Starmer must refer himself to the independent ethics adviser to determine whether he breached the ministerial code.
“He promised to clean up politics after years of Conservative sleaze and scandal, now he must lead by example.”
