LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged Monday that he made the wrong judgment when he appointed Jeffrey Epstein ’s friend Peter Mandelson as U.K. ambassador to Washington, but said he would not have done so if he had known Mandelson had failed security checks.
Starmer faced a barrage of opposition calls to resign as he tried to explain why Mandelson was given the job despite failing security vetting for the U.K.'s most important diplomatic post. Starmer brushed aside the demands, placing blame squarely on Foreign Office officials who he says failed to tell him about the security concerns.
He said the facts about Mandelson's vetting "could and should have been shared with me before he took up his post.”
Starmer told lawmakers in the House of Commons that “I would not have gone ahead with the appointment” had he known. Mandelson was fired in September, nine months into the job, when new details emerged about his friendship with Epstein.
Starmer's explanation was greeted with jeers from opposition lawmakers, incredulous that the nation's leader hadn't known such a crucial piece of information.
“I know many members across the House will find these facts to be incredible," Starmer said. "To that, I can only say they are right. It beggars belief.”
Opposition Conservative Party lawmaker Kemi Badenoch said Starmer's lack of curiosity was hard to believe.
“It doesn’t appear that he asked any questions at all. Why? Because he didn’t want to know," she said.
Starmer resists pressure to resign
Starmer was attempting to set the record straight after repeatedly telling lawmakers that “due process” was followed when Mandelson was appointed. He now says he’s “furious” that he wasn’t informed that an intensive vetting process had recommended Mandelson not be given security clearance. The Foreign Office, which oversees diplomatic appointments, cleared him anyway.
Source: WPLG
