On these occasions, MPs have a solemn duty to reflect the public’s anger and need for answers. A pity that so few seem able to fulfil it
Around the time of Peter Mandelson’s appointment as the UK’s ambassador to Washington in late 2024, Nigel Farage, our possible next prime minister, said that while he “might disagree with Mandelson on his politics” he was “a very intelligent man”, who would be a good choice for the job. If the Tories raised objections at the time, they are not exactly seared to this day on the collective memory. As one senior Labour figure put it to me on Sunday: “They all thought it was a very smart political move back then. Now they are all full of this righteous indignation.”
Certainly, in MPs’ defence, we know much more now than we did then about Mandelson’s enduring links with Jeffery Epstein. And thanks to the Guardian’s extraordinary revelation last week, which rekindled this crisis and turned it into one about the entire workings of government, we discovered that Mandelson actually failed the official Foreign Office vetting job for the job but was appointed nonetheless.
Toby Helm is a political commentator and former political editor of the Observer
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.