LONDON (AP) 鈥� U.K. on Tuesday averted a parliamentary inquiry over his choice of as British ambassador to Washington, but failed to quell questions about whether he bent the rules to make the controversial appointment.
In a boost for the prime minister, the House of Commons rejected a move by opposition politicians to trigger a parliamentary standards investigation into Starmer. But a former senior official said he could not confirm that 鈥渄ue process鈥� was followed when Mandelson, a friend of , was given the key diplomatic job despite failing .
Reverberations from the ill-fated appointment have left Starmer fighting for his job, and at odds with his civil service. The prime minister is angry he wasn鈥檛 told that Mandelson had failed security vetting, while senior officials say they felt pressure from Starmer鈥檚 office to confirm the appointment quickly at the start of 鈥檚 second term.
鈥淚 was presented with a decision and told to get on with it,鈥� said Philip Barton, who was top civil servant in the Foreign Office when the choice of Mandelson was announced in December 2024. 鈥淭he prime minister had been made aware of the risks and had accepted the risks.鈥�
Starmer鈥檚 former top aide says sorry
Starmer鈥檚 former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, acknowledged Tuesday he鈥檇 made a 鈥渟erious mistake鈥� by recommending Mandelson, but denied pressuring officials to ignore security concerns.
McSweeney told lawmakers on the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee that 鈥渢he prime minister relied on my advice, and I got it wrong.鈥� He apologized to Epstein鈥檚 victims, saying 鈥淚 am sorry for any part this controversy has played in causing further hurt or distress.鈥�
But he insisted that he didn鈥檛 鈥渁sk officials to ignore procedures, request that steps should be skipped, or communicate explicitly or implicitly that checks should be cleared at all costs.鈥�
Starmer in September after new details emerged about the ambassador鈥檚 friendship with Epstein, a convicted sex offender who .
into Mandelson in February over allegations that he passed sensitive government information to Epstein when he was a member of the U.K. government in 2009. He denies wrongdoing and hasn鈥檛 been charged.
McSweeney, who called Mandelson an adviser and confidant, , saying he took responsibility for the ambassadorial appointment.
McSweeney said that he felt Mandelson鈥檚 experience as a former European Union trade commissioner would serve the U.K. well in striking a trade deal with the Trump administration.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 think the prime minister would have chosen Mandelson if Kamala Harris had been elected president,鈥� he said.
Government denies pressuring officials
But McSweeney denied allegations that pressured officials to rush through the confirmation.
He said that at the time of the appointment, he had the impression that Mandelson鈥檚 relationship with Epstein was 鈥渁 passing acquaintance.鈥� When emails were published showing the friendship was close, 鈥渋t was a knife through my soul,鈥� McSweeney said.
Starmer fired top Foreign Office official Olly Robbins earlier this month after the revelation that Mandelson was approved for the job against the recommendation of the government鈥檚 security vetting agency. Starmer has called it 鈥渟taggering鈥� that Robbins failed to tell him about the security concerns.
Robbins says he was bound by confidentiality rules. He has said the concerns didn鈥檛 relate to Epstein, though he hasn鈥檛 disclosed what they were about.
It鈥檚 rare but not unknown for U.K. ambassadors to be political appointees rather than career diplomats. Barton, who was Robbins鈥� predecessor at the Foreign Office until January 2025, told the Foreign Affairs Committee that he was concerned Mandelson鈥檚 known links to 鈥渢oxic, hot potato鈥� Epstein 鈥渃ould become a problem.鈥�
鈥淭here was pressure to get everything done as quickly as possible,鈥� said Barton 鈥� though he denied there was pressure for a specific outcome.
Starmer has denied that anyone in his office put pressure on the civil service.
Opponents tried to force an inquiry
Critics say Starmer鈥檚 decision to appoint Mandelson is evidence of bad judgment by a prime minister who has made since he led the center-left Labour Party to a in July 2024.
Starmer already in February, when some Labour lawmakers urged him to quit over the Mandelson appointment. He could face a new challenge if, as expected, Labour takes a hammering in May 7 local and regional elections, which give voters a chance to pass a midterm verdict on the government.
He managed to win a vote Tuesday in the House of Commons, where lawmakers rejected by 335 votes to 223 a demand by the opposition Conservative Party for Parliament鈥檚 Privileges Committee to investigate Starmer鈥檚 claim that 鈥渄ue process鈥� was followed in Mandelson鈥檚 appointment.
The committee has the power to suspend lawmakers, including the prime minister, for breaches of the rules, and a finding of deliberately misleading Parliament is usually a resigning offense.
鈥淚t鈥檚 clear that full due process was not followed,鈥� Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said, adding that 鈥渁ppointing a known national security risk to be ambassador to the United States is a profound failure of government.鈥�
Badenoch urged Labour lawmakers not to be complicit in a 鈥渃over-up.鈥�
Starmer urged Labour legislators to 鈥渟tick together鈥� and vote against the motion, calling it a 鈥渟tunt鈥� timed to damage the party before the May elections.
Many heeded the call, but several criticized Starmer during debate in the House of Commons. Labour lawmaker Emma Lewell said that 鈥渓ike the public, I feel let down, disappointed and I am angry.
鈥淧eter Mandelson should never have been appointed,鈥� she said. 鈥淭his was a fundamental failure of judgment.鈥�
___
Associated Press writer Sylvia Hui contributed to this story.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
