Kemi Badenoch has demanded evidence that Lord Mandelson underwent proper security checks before being appointed British ambassador to the United States, accusing Sir Keir Starmer of dismissing standard vetting procedures.
The Tory leader claims the appointment of the former Labour cabinet minister to what she describes as “the biggest job in the Foreign Office” was pushed through despite serious concerns about his background.
The controversy centres on Lord Mandelson’s well-documented relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the American financier who died in prison in 2019.
Documents released by the US Department of Justice appear to show bank statements indicating Lord Mandelson received $75,000 across three payments from Epstein in 2003 and 2004.
Speaking to reporters, Kemi Badenoch said: “Well, what we know is that the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, a close protégé of Peter Mandelson, was involved in the vetting.
“It wasn’t the thorough vetting procedures that we would have expected.
“What we know is that this plum job, British ambassador to the US, the biggest job in the Foreign Office, was given to a political appointee above the heads of lots of civil servants who’ve worked for decades and who would have been more qualified.
“The Prime Minister needs to answer that question of why it appears that the vetting was waved away, and instead he just made an appointment of someone who was very well known to be the close friend and associate of a convicted paedophile.”
Kemi Badenoch demanded proof of a proper vetting process from the PM
|
POOL
When asked if she was calling on Morgan McSweeney to be sacked, she replied: “I think that the Prime Minister has a lot of questions to answer about Morgan McSweeney.
“He is a man whose fingerprints are all over this embarrassment. It’s a national embarrassment that Peter Mandelson, the close friend of a notorious paedophile, was appointed British ambassador above many better and qualified candidates.
“And that is why we’re forcing this parliamentary, this rare parliamentary mechanism, forcing the Government.
“We want to know what Morgan McSweeney knew and did and, most importantly, what the Prime Minister knew and why all of this was waved away.”
LATEST ON THE EPSTEIN FILES
Lord Mandelson had previously admitted to his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein | GETTY
On her message to Labour MPs ahead of tomorrow’s vote: “I think Labour MPs need to do what they know is right.
“This is not about party politics right now; this is about the reputation of our Parliament and our country.
“There is no reason why Peter Mandelson should have been appointed to that role, given everything we knew about his close association with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
“The fact that the Prime Minister still went ahead and did that after multiple people, including myself, had raised concerns, is something that needs to be looked at by all of us in Parliament, whether they are Labour or Conservative MPs.”
Keir Starmer initially appointed Lord Mandelson to the Washington posting a year ago but subsequently dismissed him after earlier Epstein-related files emerged showing the peer had remained in contact with the billionaire even following his conviction.
The Metropolitan Police confirmed on Monday evening that they had received multiple reports concerning alleged misconduct in public office.
Officers will assess whether these complaints reach the threshold required to launch a formal criminal investigation.
A Government spokesperson responded that determining whether to investigate was properly a matter for police, adding that ministers would offer whatever assistance law enforcement required.
Downing Street has expressed support for any police inquiry into whether Lord Mandelson unlawfully disclosed sensitive Government information to Epstein during his time in cabinet.
