Brian Wheeler
Political reporter

Image source, PA Media

Keir Starmer says Peter Mandelson lied to him about the extent of his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Back in September, the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg revealed that Mandelson had been asked by the prime minister about why he had continued his friendship with Epstein after his conviction for soliciting sex with a minor.

As part of the vetting process for Mandelson’s appointment, Sir Keir asked Mandelson to address three specific questions, which were sent to him via email by the PM’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney.

The three questions were:

1. Why has he continued contact with Epstein after he was convicted?
2. Why was he reported to have stayed in one of Epstein's homes while the financier was in prison?
3. And was he associated with a charity founded by Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell that the financier had backed?

The answers Mandelson gave to these questions are now likely to be published by the government, and ministers believe they will show that Mandelson lied.

The BBC understands Mandelson’s view is that he answered questions about his relationship with Epstein in the vetting process accurately.

Home Office minister Mike Tapp is asked on BBC Breakfast where he stands in terms of support for Starmer as prime minister and leader of the Labour party.

Although he doesn't directly answer the question, Tapp says: "This is obviously really difficult and what I am very pleased to see is that the prime minster has clearly apologised to the victims and apologised for appointing Mandelson and believing his clear lies.

"I am here on behalf of the government today and I want to extend that apology too."

Tapp is pressed again whether Starmer should be prime minister in light of what has happened. "I do, absolutely," replies Tapp.

He says that the PM has apologised for believing Peter Mandelson’s lies, adding that "transparency is very important and that’s what we are seeing from this government, that’s owning the mistakes".

Harry Farley
Political correspondent

There is real frustration among people I speak to in government that the Metropolitan Police is asking them not to release the documents around Peter Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador.

The argument we're hearing from the prime minister and other ministers is that Mandelson lied during that process about the extent of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. And they insist these documents will prove that is right.

But Scotland Yard has asked that some documents are not released. Detectives worry they might prejudice their criminal investigation into whether Mandelson committed misconduct in public office by leaking sensitive information to Epstein.

But the so-called Mandelson files that the government must release go much wider than just that around his appointment. They include all "electronic communications" (so WhatsApp messages, emails etc.) between Mandelson and government ministers, officials and special advisers during his time as ambassador.

That is a huge amount of information. It has the potential to be embarrassing for people in government previously close to Mandelson, including the health secretary and possible successor to Starmer, Wes Streeting. All of that information is likely to take several months to discover, and eventually publish.

Here's the headlines making Friday's front pages which are dominated by the political pressure facing Sir Keir Starmer.

The Daily Mail's front page saysformer deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has told friends she is "ready to go" on a leadership campaign.

However the Daily Telegraph reports that an unresolved HMRC investigation into Rayner's failure to pay a £40,000 stamp duty bill on a flat could hinder any potential bid for the party's leadership.

Elsewhere, the Daily Mirror says there is a "Keir and present danger" to the prime minister's tenure because of Mandelson's relationship with Epstein.

Meanwhile the Times says the release of documents relating to Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador has the potential to be "politically explosive".

• You can read a full and detailed review here of Friday's newspapers

Jack Fenwick
Political correspondent

Image source, House of Commons

The underlying anger among Labour MPs towards Sir Keir Starmer is still palpable.

While the handful of backbenchers who have spoken out publicly are frequent critics of the PM, many more have raised concerns privately.

"He's toast," one Labour MP told the BBC. "It's got an inevitability but not an immediacy about it," another said.

"He's like a wounded wildebeest: fatally wounded but determined to show how strong he is knowing full well the end is nigh," said a third.

Others are more supportive, one writing: "I still think most Labour MP anger is directed at Mandelson himself rather than at Keir."

Jonathan Hinder, the MP for Pendle and Clitheroe, said the PM's decision to appoint Lord Mandelson as US ambassador was a "catastrophic error of political and moral judgement".

Starmer's former political director Luke Sullivan said he thought the PM was "fighting for his premiership".

He told the BBC's Newscast: "I don't think you can understate how serious the situation and the peril is that the prime minister finds himself in."

Former deputy Labour leader Baroness Harriet Harman said the PM's defence that Mandelson lied to him makes him look "weak and naive and gullible".

"I don't think it's inevitable that it will bring him down, but it will bring him down unless he takes the action that it's really necessary for him to take," she told Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction podcast.

Simon Opher, Labour MP for Stroud, believes Starmer was "really let down" by his advisers over the Mandelson scandal.

"There is a lot of anger amongst Labour MPs, because yesterday I wanted to be talking about the cancer care plan not about Peter Mandelson," he tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"Keir Starmer needs to change his advisers in No 10. I think he has been badly advised and he has been really let down, particularly on this decision. I think we need a bit of a clear out of No 10."

Opher was pressed on whether, in his view, this would mean the prime minister's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney being relieved of his duties.

"I think so," Opher said. "I think if my chief of staff had done this, I think he would be looking for another job."

Nick Eardley
Political correspondent

Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has set out its understanding on how documents relating to Lord Mandelson will be published.

The committee says the government should decide which documents are made public – and which are not.

They say this will be done by the cabinet secretary, with an expectation the documents are laid before Parliament "very shortly".

The "limited number" of documents which are not made public will then be sent to the committee.

The committee says those documents should be unredacted. It also says the government must make clear which parts of the document are considered prejudicial for national security or international relations.

The ISC will then make its own judgement on whether exemptions should apply. It adds it reserves the right to decide how to deal with that material.

The prime minister's former communications director, James Lyons, tells BBC Newsnight that the Mandelson revelations are "at least the biggest scandal since the expenses scandal" in 2009.

Lyons worked in No 10 from 2024-25, but says he was not consulted on the decision to appoint Mandelson as US ambassador.

"I don't think anyone can understate the gravity of the situation," he says. "I think we could just be in the foothills here."

He adds that it is not yet clear which other public figures could be dragged into the scandal. For context, senior figures in the government are now preparing to hand over tranches of their private messages with Mandelson.

Despite this, Lyons doesn't necessarily think this is the end for Starmer. "Can the prime minister survive? Yes of course he can," he says.

Brian Leishman, Labour MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, says Keir Starmer's apology to Epstein's victims yesterday was "nowhere near enough".

He says the PM has shown "incredible misjudgement" in appointing Mandelson. "It goes beyond saying sorry," he tells BBC Breakfast.

Asked about Starmer's future, Leishman says the situation is developing "hour by hour, day by day". He adds that "people who surround" the PM also need to be looked at, including his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney.

Pushed again on Starmer's future, Leishman says the PM should live by his own words and "put country before party".

Asked how many colleagues share this sentiment, Leishman says he won't speak for others, but adds that their position was clear in the House of Commons on Wednesday, when they called for "transparency, openness and honesty".

Leishman says it is "absolutely, categorically" a good procedure for ministers to hand over private communications with Mandelson.

Jack Fenwick
Political correspondent

No 10 will be relieved that only a handful of backbenchers have publicly questioned the prime minister's position.

But the underlying anger among Labour MPs - towards Sir Keir Starmer - is still palpable.

He's promised to release files related to Lord Mandelson's appointment as the UK's ambassador to the US in December 2024.

Any documents the government deems potentially unfit for the public eye will go to parliament's intelligence and security committee for further scrutiny.

That committee has said it expects the government to provide all documents within scope of that process – which would include personal exchanges between government figures and Peter Mandelson - stretching back to Labour's election victory.

Starmer insists the files will prove that Lord Mandelson lied as part of the process.

But if the documents published cause any further embarrassment for the government - over what was known about Lord Mandelson and Epstein's relationship - it would likely lead to yet another difficult moment in which Labour MPs consider publicly voicing their anger.

Senior government figures are preparing to hand over tranches of their electronic communications with Peter Mandelson ahead of the release of evidence about his appointment as US ambassador.

No 10’s former communications director has warned the disclosure of private messages could drag more public figures into the scandal.

It comes after Keir Starmer apologised to Jeffrey Epstein’s victims yesterday for believing Mandelson’s “lies” and appointing him as US ambassador.

The BBC understands Mandelson's view is that he answered questions about his relationship with Epstein in the vetting process accurately.

Starmer is facing calls from some of his own MPs to stand down, with others calling for his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney to leave No 10.

Our political editor Chris Mason writes that the PM has never looked more vulnerable.

We'll be bringing you the key developments and analysis throughout the day.