The handling of the situation has caused anger across the Labour benches.
Labour MPs have expressed anger over the appointment, and subsequent delayed sacking, of Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the United States
Questions are being particularly directed at Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister’s chief of staff.
Mandelson was dismissed this week over his links to convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. It has emerged that Downing Street was already aware of Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein at the time of his appointment. But No. 10 claims “new information” about the extent of their friendship only came to light this week, prompting the dismissal.
The handling of the situation has caused anger across the Labour benches. Liverpool Wavertree MP Paula Barker said the delay in Mandelson’s sacking has “only served to further erode the trust and confidence in our government and politics in the round.”
Warrington North MP Charlotte Nichols said Mandelson’s sacking was “not immediate enough unfortunately, as he should never have been appointed in the first place.”
Focus is now turning to McSweeney’s role in the episode. Several senior Labour figures allege that he resisted the inevitability of Mandelson’s departure, with one insider describing a mood of “cold, hard fury” inside Downing Street.
However, another senior No. 10 source called such claims “nonsense” and insisted that McSweeney had quickly concluded that Mandelson’s position was no longer tenable.
Speaking to BBC Breakfast, Scottish Labour secretary Douglas Alexander acknowledged that many Labour MPs will be feeling “despondent” following a chaotic couple of weeks, which has also seen the resignation of deputy prime minister Angela Rayner.
“Many of us were devastated by Angela Rayner’s departure from the government last week.
“Now to have the dismissal of Peter Mandelson just the next week, I totally get it, of course Labour MPs will be despondent that in two weeks in a row we have seen significant resignations from public service.
“These are not the headlines any of us in government or in Parliament would have chosen or wanted.
“But the fact is when the evidence emerged, action had to be taken and we are looking forward, therefore, to moving on.”
Left Foot Forward doesn’t have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
