Starmer's Former Chief of Staff Brands Peter Mandelson's Appointment a 'Serious Error of Judgement' During High Stakes Commons Inquiry

Speaking to MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) on Tuesday Kier Starmer's former Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney said that his recommendation to the PM to appoint Peter Mandelson was a 'serious error of judgement.'

'Like a Knife Through My Soul'

Speaking to the committee, McSweeney said: 'I resigned because I believe responsibility should rest with those who make serious mistakes. Accountability in public life cannot apply only when it is convenient. The prime minister relied on my advice, and I got it wrong,' according to the Irish Times.

'What I did do was make a recommendation based on my judgment that Mandelson's experience, relationships and political skills could serve the national interest in Washington at an important moment. That judgment was a mistake.'

'What I did not do was oversee national security vetting, ask officials to ignore procedures, request that steps should be skipped, or communicate explicitly or implicitly that checks should be cleared at all costs. I would never have considered that acceptable.'

McSweeney also said that upon finding out Mandelson was linked with Epstein was 'like a knife through my soul.'

McSweeney added that 'I did not expect that level of connection, he said.' 'I thought he had reestablished himself as a credible, political figure.'

'The nature of the relationship that I understood he had with Epstein was not a close friendship. How I understood it at the time was a passing acquaintance that he regretted having and that he apologised for,' when asked about what he thought the nature of the relationship between Mandelson and Epstein was like.

'What has emerged since then was way, way, way worse than I had expected at the time, he continued.

House Vote Imminent

Testimony my McSweeney comes just hours before the house votes on whether Starmer should face an inquiry as to whether he misled the house.

'I have responsibility for being totally transparent with you, with parliament and the British public,' Starmer said earlier. 'I take that very seriously as well.'

'But this is not about a lack of transparency. This is a political stunt by our opponents who want to bring us down, obscure our message, stop us getting on with our work. And the timing tells you everything, nine days before local elections ... Tomorrow is pure politics and we need to stand together against it, he continued.'

Why Did Mandelson Resign in the First Place?

In February, the latest release of files by the US Department of Justice revealed documents suggesting Epstein made $75,000 (£55,000) in payments to Lord Mandelson in three separate $25,000 transactions in 2003 and 2004.

Lord Mandelson then quit the party he has been a leading player in for more than three decades, saying he did not want to 'cause further embarrassment.'

In his letter to Labour's general secretary, Lord Mandelson said: 'Allegations which I believe to be false that he made financial payments to me 20 years ago, and of which I have no record or recollection, need investigating by me.'

'While doing this, I do not wish to cause further embarrassment to the Labour Party and I am therefore stepping down from membership of the party.'

'I want to take this opportunity to repeat my apology to the women and girls whose voices should have been heard long before now.' according to the BBC.