Listen to the article
Morgan McSweeney, the chief of staff to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, resigned on Sunday amid growing criticism over his role in recommending Peter Mandelson for the position of United Kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.
In his resignation statement, McSweeney acknowledged that recommending Mandelson was “wrong” and took full responsibility for his advice. “He [Mandelson] has damaged our party, our country and trust in politics itself,” McSweeney wrote, describing his resignation as the “only honourable course” given the circumstances.
The controversy centers around Mandelson’s connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. According to documents released by the Justice Department in January, Mandelson maintained contact with Epstein after his 2008 conviction on two felony counts of soliciting prostitution, including one involving a minor.
McSweeney called for a comprehensive overhaul of the government’s vetting and due diligence processes while pledging his continued support for Starmer and the Labour government’s agenda. His departure marks a significant setback for Starmer’s administration, which has been in power for less than a year after Labour’s victory in the 2025 general election.
The Associated Press reported that newly surfaced documents suggest Mandelson may have shared sensitive government information with Epstein following the 2008 global financial crisis. Financial records also indicate that Epstein transferred approximately $75,000 to accounts connected to Mandelson or his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, in 2003 and 2004.
The revelations have sparked a political firestorm in the UK. On September 11, Foreign Office Minister Stephen Doughty informed the House of Commons that Prime Minister Starmer had withdrawn Mandelson’s appointment after emails revealed his relationship with Epstein was “materially different” from what was known when he was appointed.
“In particular, Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information,” Doughty told Parliament. “In light of that and mindful, as we all are, of the victims of Epstein’s appalling crimes, Lord Mandelson has been withdrawn as ambassador with immediate effect.”
Mandelson subsequently resigned from the Labour Party on February 1, further distancing himself from a party where he once wielded significant influence. A key figure during the Tony Blair era, Mandelson was known as one of the architects of “New Labour” in the 1990s and held several cabinet positions.
The scandal has raised serious questions about the vetting procedures for high-profile diplomatic appointments and has become a significant political liability for Starmer’s government, which came to power promising transparency and ethical leadership.
Political analysts suggest the controversy could have broader implications for UK-US relations at a critical time when both countries are navigating post-Brexit trade agreements and coordinating responses to various international challenges, including ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.
The position of ambassador to the United States is considered one of the most prestigious and strategically important diplomatic posts in British foreign service. The role involves maintaining the “special relationship” between the two allies and representing British interests in Washington.
McSweeney’s resignation highlights the political fallout from the scandal and indicates the seriousness with which the government is now treating the matter. As one of Starmer’s closest advisers, his departure creates a significant void in the Prime Minister’s inner circle at a time when the administration is still implementing its domestic and foreign policy agenda.
The government has not yet announced McSweeney’s replacement or a new nominee for the ambassador position.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


11 Comments
This highlights the need for greater scrutiny of potential appointees, especially those with any links to controversial or unethical figures. The government must be proactive in rooting out potential conflicts of interest or ethical issues.
You’re right. Transparency and rigorous vetting should be the norm, not the exception, when it comes to high-profile government appointments. The public deserves leaders they can trust.
This is a significant setback for Starmer’s administration. Appointing someone with ties to Epstein is a serious misstep that damages the government’s credibility. A full review of the vetting process is essential to regain public trust.
Absolutely. The government needs to demonstrate a clear commitment to transparency and ethical conduct, especially when it comes to high-profile appointments. Anything less will erode public confidence.
This is a troubling development for Starmer’s government. Appointing someone with ties to Epstein is a significant lapse in judgment that damages public trust. A full review of vetting processes is warranted to ensure such missteps are not repeated.
Agreed. Accountability is important, and McSweeney’s resignation is a step in the right direction. However, more needs to be done to restore faith in the administration’s decision-making.
The resignation of the chief of staff is a necessary step, but it doesn’t address the root problem. The government must take this opportunity to implement robust reforms to its vetting and due diligence processes to prevent such issues from happening again.
While the resignation is a necessary step, it’s concerning that such a lapse in judgment occurred in the first place. The government must take this opportunity to thoroughly examine its decision-making processes and implement reforms to prevent similar issues in the future.
While the resignation is a necessary action, it’s concerning that such a significant misstep occurred in the first place. The Labour government needs to demonstrate it is taking this issue seriously and implement robust reforms to prevent similar lapses in the future.
This is a disappointing development that undermines public confidence. The government must learn from this experience and strengthen its processes to ensure only the most qualified and ethically sound candidates are considered for important positions.
Agreed. Restoring trust will require a comprehensive review and tangible reforms to the vetting procedures. The public deserves leaders who are above reproach.