👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈
Keir Starmer has already admitted that appointing Peter Mandelson as US ambassador was a mistake. But after the first batch of documents was released, Beth, Ruth and Harriet ask the big question: we still don’t know how big that ‘mistake’ was – could it get worse with what is yet to come out about what the prime minister knew about Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein?
In this episode we break down:
What’s in the first tranche of documents around Peter Mandelson’s appointment (and what’s still missing)
The red flags raised before Mandelson was appointed and why the process looks so rushed
What “developed vetting” actually is, and why it could become the key detail
The growing political risk for Starmer, including questions around what was said in the Commons
Starmer risks misleading Commons claims if Mandelson story doesn’t match files, warns Harman
Mandelson files: It’s difficult to see how Starmer can put this right
PM set to face fresh questions after Mandelson revelations
Peter Mandelson has consistently denied any criminal wrongdoing and he is cooperating with the police investigation.
Plus, a powerful moment in parliament this week as Labour MPs Charlotte Nichols and Natalie Fleet speak about their own experiences as victims. How do their stories feed into the government’s legal reforms? And what would the plans mean for justice, juries and the courts’ backlog?
Got a question for the burner phone? WhatsApp 07934 200 444 or email [email protected].
