Starmer's Chief of Staff Used Personal Email for Mandelson Communications
Sir Keir Starmer's former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, reportedly utilised his private email address and WhatsApp to communicate with Peter Mandelson ahead of Mandelson's contentious appointment as US ambassador. This revelation has ignited further accusations of a deliberate "cover-up" within the government, as these messages were conspicuously absent from the first batch of official files released to the public.
Missing Communications Spark Cover-Up Allegations
The government published an initial tranche of documents on Wednesday relating to Lord Mandelson's appointment to the sensitive Washington role, from which he was later forced to resign due to his connections with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. These files contained merely 31 messages and documents, all originating from official email addresses, and notably excluded any correspondence from Morgan McSweeney, despite his pivotal role in the decision to appoint the disgraced peer.
Sources have informed The Times that Mr McSweeney employed his personal email and WhatsApp for communications with Lord Mandelson prior to the appointment. None of these messages have been published, raising significant transparency concerns.
Alex Burghart, the shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, responded forcefully to the reports, stating: "The stench of a cover-up over the Mandelson files is overwhelming." He emphasised that after weeks of delay, Labour has only partially released files, with vital information—including communications from the prime minister and key advisers—clearly missing. Burghart insisted the government must release all relevant communications, including those on non-corporate devices, and vowed to hold them accountable.
Prime Minister's Involvement Under Scrutiny
Further complicating the matter, it was revealed that Sir Keir Starmer himself did not speak to Lord Mandelson during the vetting process. Downing Street asserted on Friday that there was "no requirement" for the Prime Minister to formally interview the peer for the US ambassadorship, amidst accusations of insufficient prime ministerial involvement.
No 10 acknowledged there are "lessons to be learned" from the appointment process but maintained that due diligence was followed. Sir Keir's official spokesman clarified: "There was no requirement for a formal interview with the Prime Minister."
Earlier in the week, Downing Street was compelled to deny allegations of a cover-up following claims that the prime minister misled MPs over the vetting process. The absence of Sir Keir's own comments in the released government papers has drawn intense scrutiny, questioning whether he misled MPs by asserting that "full due process" had been adhered to.
Internal Concerns and Political Fallout
The released files indicated that national security adviser Jonathan Powell expressed concerns, describing the appointment as "weirdly rushed." Tory leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the files, pointing out that "a lot of information is missing," including an empty box Sir Keir was supposed to fill with his response to advice received in 2024.
No 10 stated that no notes by Sir Keir were redacted, implying the prime minister did not complete the box. However, the PM's spokesperson repeatedly defended the process, refuting cover-up suggestions and committing to review and improve vetting and due diligence procedures, which they admitted are "not up to scratch."
Mrs Badenoch requested an investigation by the PM's independent ethics adviser, Sir Laurie Magnus, into potential breaches of the ministerial code, but he found no grounds for an inquiry. The prime minister continues to face questions about his judgment in appointing Lord Mandelson, especially after being warned of a "general reputational risk" due to Mandelson's association with Jeffrey Epstein.
Downing Street has declined to comment further on the ongoing controversy, leaving the issue unresolved and fueling ongoing political debate.
