The British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, declared this Wednesday, April 22, before Parliament that he was unaware that Peter Mandelson had been flagged at security checks before his appointment as the United Kingdom's ambassador to the United States, in December 2024. These statements came after Olly Robbins, a senior Foreign Office official dismissed last week, stated that Starmer had a dismissive attitude towards the security verification process.

First modification: 04/22/2026 - 16:33 Last modification: 04/22/2026 - 16:44

Downing Street has denied a former official's allegation that it pressured officials to approve the appointment of Peter Mandelson as Britain's ambassador to Washington and appeared to dismiss security concerns.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer remains embroiled in scandal over his decision to appoint Mandelson to the diplomatic post in the US, before dismissing him in 2025 over his links to the late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Olly Robbins, the most senior Foreign Office official until his dismissal last week over the scandal, told Parliament that Starmer's office showed a dismissive attitude towards the US envoy's security vetting process.

There was a "strong expectation (...) coming from number 10 (Downing Street) that Mandelson should take office and be in the United States as soon as possible," Robbins told a parliamentary oversight committee.

"My office, that of the foreign minister, was under constant pressure; there was an environment of permanent pressure."

To display this content from X (Twitter), you must allow audience measurement and advertising cookies.

A Downing Street spokesperson denied these allegations, saying "there is a clear difference between asking for information about the appointment process" and being dismissive of background checks.

Government minister Darren Jones stated in an emergency debate in Parliament on Tuesday 21 April that "no pressure was brought to bear beyond asking for the process to be completed as soon as possible".

On Monday, Starmer told Parliament that he had made a mistake in appointing Mandelson, but accused officials of deliberately withholding information about the Labor politician's denial of security clearance.

The Foreign Office subsequently cleared the appointment of Mandelson — long known for his close ties to Epstein — despite the government confirming that independent vetting officers had recommended denying clearance.

This revelation, initially published by the British newspaper 'The Guardian' on Thursday, April 16, has revived calls for Starmer's resignation, after he insisted that all legal procedures had been followed.

During Tuesday's emergency debate, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch urged Labor MPs to vote on a no-confidence motion against Starmer.

The embattled British leader has blamed officials for deliberately hiding the security clearance issue from him and on Monday denied misleading Parliament with his previous statements about the scandal.

Read alsoStarmer affirms that he was not informed of the background of Mandelson, linked to Epstein

“Limited case”

In his much-anticipated testimony, Robbins offered a more nuanced assessment, insisting that he formally approved Mandelson after investigating officials — under another government department — concluded it was a “narrow” case.

“I was informed that (...) they were inclined to recommend that authorization be denied, but that the security department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs assessed that the risks could be managed or mitigated,” Robbins told parliamentarians.

”I was also told that the risks were not related to Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein,” he added.

British media have reported that concerns revolved around Mandelson's now-shuttered lobbying firm's links to Chinese companies.

Mandelson, 72, was appointed to the coveted top diplomatic post in December 2024, just weeks before the inauguration of US President Donald Trump, and took office in February 2025.

Asked about the possibility of denying Mandelson security clearance, Robbins admitted it would have been a "difficult issue that he would have had to deal with with both the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister."

However, he insisted that "that was not what I had in mind when making this decision", while noting that a refusal would have "damaged" relations between the United Kingdom and the United States.

Starmer dismissed Mandelson in September 2025, seven months after he took office, after new details emerged about the depth of the now-former ambassador's ties to Epstein, who died in a US prison in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges.

Read alsoUS Department of Justice publishes some Epstein files with accusations against Trump

“Bad choice”

British police are investigating allegations that Mandelson leaked confidential documents to Epstein when he was a minister, including during the 2008 financial crisis.

He was arrested and released last February and has not been charged. Mandelson denies any wrongdoing.

During the night, Trump, who has criticized Starmer for his alleged lack of support for the war against Iran, joined the controversy.

On his Truth Social platform, the US president agreed that Mandelson “was a very bad choice” for the position in Washington.

But, in a gesture of optimism, Trump added: “There is plenty of time to recover!”

Starmer stated last Monday, April 20, that he has launched a review of the background check process. However, former officials have accused him of looking for a “scapegoat.”

Read also “I will go to the end, I am not afraid”: a former Brazilian model confronts the Trumps over the Epstein case

This article was adapted from its original English version.

With AFP

Related keywords

The content you requested does not exist or is no longer available.