Play Brightcove video
Files released on Wednesday revealed Lord Mandelson sought a £500,000 payout after being sacked as US ambassador over his links to Jeffrey Epstein, as ITV News Political Correspondent Shehab Khan reports
Calls are growing for Peter Mandelson to return the severance pay he received after being sacked as Britain’s ambassador to the US over his links to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, as the prime minister admitted “his mistake” over the appointment.
The files, released on Thursday, showed Mandelson was paid a package of nearly £75,000, made up of £40,330 as pay in lieu of notice, and a special severance payment of £34,670 after he was sacked.
The files also revealed Mandelson had initially asked to be paid out for the remainder of his four-year tenure as ambassador, a sum which would have totalled more than half a million pounds.
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said Mandelson should “do the right thing” and return his severance payment as Tory leader Kemi Badenoch argued Lord Mandelson should not have received the £75,000 payout.
Government minister Darren Jones first told MPs in parliament Mandelson should donate the money to charity and on Thursday, his colleague in government Nick Thomas-Symonds expressed “moral outrage” over the payment, seconding calls for the money to be donated to a victims’ charity.
The prime minister faced fresh questions about his judgment in giving the peer the ambassadorship despite being warned of a “general reputational risk” because of his relationship with Epstein.
On Thursday, Starmer repeated his previous apologies, taking responsibility for his “mistake” in sending Lord Mandelson to Washington, as Downing Street denied there was a “cover-up” in the release of files related to the appointment.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday from Northern Ireland, Starmer said: “It was me that made the mistake… and it’s me that makes the apology to the victims of Epstein”.
In his first public appearance since the publication of the documents, Starmer told reporters in Northern Ireland: “The release of the information shows what was known. That led to further questions being asked.
“Unfortunately, because of the Metropolitan Police investigation, we can’t release that information yet.
“But that doesn’t take away from the fact that it was me that made a mistake, and it’s me that makes the apology to the victims of Epstein, and I do that.”
Questions have centred around what the prime minister knew, and when, after Starmer’s repeated assertion that Mandelson had lied to him during the appointment process.
Badenoch has called for Starmer to resign over his appointment of Mandelson.
Speaking on Thursday, she said: “In any normal circumstances, the prime minister would be resigning.
“He’s been shown to have lied to the Commons. He told everyone that he did not know the full extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with the convicted paedophile Jefrey Epstein, and now we can see from the release of these files that that is not true.
“Labour MPs now need to consider their position and ask themselves in good conscience, should this man be running our country. He has shown a complete lack of judgment, catastrophic error after catastrophic error.”
In February, Starmer said he regretted appointing Mandelson, saying: “If I knew then what I know now, he would never have been anywhere near government.”
“In any normal circumstances, the prime minister would be resigning,” said Badenoch as she accused the PM of lying to MPs.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: “There will be people looking at the sum of money he was paid, saying he shouldn’t have got it.”
“We would prefer, as the government, that he either paid it back or, better still, donated it to a charity that supports victims of violence against women and girls,” he said.
“What I can tell you is that the reason that money was paid out at all was because the alternative was a potentially costly legal battle that would have cost the taxpayer even more than that sum of money.
He added: “I hope Peter Mandelson will do the right thing and either return it or, better still, donate it to charity.”
Speaking to Good Morning Britain, Women’s MinisterJess Phillips, backed the PM’s apology, saying Starmer had made it “incredibly clear, that it was a terrible mistake”.
“There is nobody, no prime minister certainly that I’ve ever worked under, either on the frontline or now, who I have ever found as much of an ally on violence against women and girls,” she said.
The Minister for Violence Against Women and Girls, Jess Phillips, backed the prime minister’s record when asked about his judgment in appointing Peter Mandelson.
Thomas-Symonds did admit the due diligence report detailing Mandelson’s connections to Epstein raised “serious questions”.
“The prime minister then did put those questions to Lord Mandelson. The prime minister has said he was misled. He deeply regrets believing the reassurances he was given.
“He has apologised for believing what was said to him by Peter Mandelson.”
The documents and messages showing both the follow-up questions the prime minister asked and Mandelson’s response were not included in the batch of documents released on Thursday, as the police had advised they could prejudice their ongoing investigation into the former ambassador.
Darren Jones insisted to MPs in the Commons that the documents would show the lies told by Mandelson when they are eventually published.
Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.
Starmer’s official spokesman said there was no “cover up” after a comment box in the due diligence report reserved for his response was left blank.
The Prime Minister did not write any notes on the document, therefore nothing was redacted, ITV News understands.
The PM’s official spokesman told reporters: “I refute the suggestion of a cover-up. The government has complied fully. I just don’t accept that it’s the case at all.
“There are a range of different ways in which the prime minister’s senior team responds to advice.
Downing Street said: “The prime minister did read the advice, but clearly there are lessons to be learned on the wider appointment processes, and the processes that led up to them.”
Keir Starmer has faced questions over what he knew about Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein when he appointed him US ambassador. Credit: PA
Speaking on Thursday, Badenoch repeated similar comments she had made on Wednesday.
“The comments which Keir Starmer would have put on the box notes – those are the cover notes where you explain what you want to happen – are missing.
“They have been removed. We need the full details of what the prime minister did. There is still a cover up going on.”
Her questions on the prime minister’s fitness to govern were echoed by Labour MP and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell, who told ITV News he had questioned Starmer’s judgment when Mandelson was first appointed.
McDonnell went on to say: “I think this last period in government itself has demonstrated, I hate to say it, but I think he’s severely lacking in the ability to be prime minister.”
Stopping short of calling for the PM’s immediate resignation, he said: “It’s for him to decide if he’s up to this job… And he does need to look at whether or not he thinks he’s the right person to continue on in this role.”
From Westminster to Washington DC – our political experts are across all the latest key talking points. Listen to the latest episode below…