McSweeney steps down over fallout from Mandelson's US ambassador appointment

Morgan McSweeney, key adviser to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, has resigned following mounting pressure over his role in appointing Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US. This decision comes amid an investigation into Mandelson's connections with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, raising serious questions of misconduct.

McSweeney, acknowledging he did not oversee the vetting process, expressed his commitment to taking full responsibility for advising on Mandelson's appointment. His sudden departure leaves Starmer facing intense criticism and scrutiny over his decision to hire Mandelson for the Washington post, despite Mandelson’s well-documented ties to Epstein.

Emails revealed that Starmer had dismissed Mandelson in September after messages emerged showing support for Epstein, including praise during Epstein's legal troubles. Additional documents have since exposed Mandelson's ongoing contact with Epstein after his 2008 conviction, suggesting potential leaks of sensitive government information. This has led to a police investigation into alleged misconduct in public office.

The Labour Party is now divided, with some MPs openly questioning Starmer’s judgment and leadership. York Central MP Rachael Maskell emphasized the urgent need for Starmer to demonstrate capability and restore confidence within a tight timeframe. Alloa and Grangemouth MP Brian Leishman called for Starmer to reconsider his leadership position for the good of the party and the country.

Despite the turmoil, supporters like Karl Turner, MP for Kingston upon Hull East, have backed Starmer, acknowledging his acknowledgment of the mistake and urging the party to unite. Rugby MP John Slinger echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for solidarity in challenging times.

The Fire Brigades Union's leader, Steve Wright, amplified calls for Starmer’s resignation, becoming the first affiliated union leader to do so. McSweeney's resignation is a significant blow to Starmer, particularly given McSweeney's role in orchestrating Starmer's successful Labour leadership bid in 2020 and the general election campaign in 2024.

McSweeney’s assistants, Jill Cuthbertson and Vidhya Alakeson, have been appointed acting chiefs of staff. In a statement, McSweeney admitted Mandelson's appointment was "wrong," acknowledging the damage it caused to the party and public trust. He stressed the necessity for reform in the vetting processes moving forward.

The Labour leadership faces a critical juncture as they navigate the repercussions of this scandal. Starmer is set to address Labour MPs in a private meeting, seeking to reassure backbenchers of his capacity to manage the crisis and reclaim control. The opposition parties have been quick to seize the opportunity, with the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats criticizing Starmer’s leadership and decision-making.

This controversy highlights underlying tensions within Labour, posing a challenge to unity as the party attempts to refocus on its political agenda. McSweeney's exit underscores the ongoing fallout from Mandelson's appointment and the complexities confronting Starmer's leadership.

Key Takeaways

• McSweeney resigns amid Mandelson appointment fallout.

• Labour MPs divided over Starmer's ongoing leadership.

• Mandelson's ties to Epstein trigger police investigation.

  

Adapted by ASEAN Now from Source 2026-02.08

 

 

View full article

So McSweeney has gone ? Big deal ? He's not even an MP and in effect, just a gofer ! So get on with the job Labour . . .

Labour won a sweeping victory with a massive 174 seat majority but on just 33% of the vote - the system is crazy. Glaring mistakes have been made by Starmer's Govt. but in the case of Mandelson, Starmer was faced with the prospect of a rampant and lawless USA President and the appointment seemed to me, to have been an understandable (but losing), gamble.

The UK is one of many Nations ruled by anti-incumbency and a media overload that makes a sport of provoking the Public in overturning political figures - there's just too much 24 hour insight and examination and clever negativity.

Why is this ? The basic situation in the UK is so damn bad with massive trade and debt crises just running on and on and no Party tells the electorate the honest truth. Therefore, the Govt never deals with the fundamentals and the electorate is ALWAYS disappointed.

After Johnson was hounded out, the Truss farce ensured it's own demise. I'm not a Tory but I thought Sunak/Hunt were doing a good, steady job in the face of the almost insurmountable.

Labour MP's should get ONSIDE and try to influence their Govt. quietly to face the real facts - I suspect they are just not bright enough. And when Labour are thrown out, (probably for worse alternatives), many of them will struggle to get a job that pays as well as being an MP.

I hope Labour unites now under Starmer and the McSweeney departure is seen in context - you Guys have a job to do so get on with it ! Please !!

The UK voting public had the chance in 2011 to replace FPTP with AV. They resoundingly rejected the change in the national referendum.

Roadster that's a fact. And IMO a mistake. The voting system is crazy. But it's almost irrelevant - Labour are IN and should get on with it. Unite and say b*llocks to the Pundits.

Rats fighting in a sack.

Ironic that the lefties thought the Epstein files would bring down Trump and now they look to be bringing down Starmer and putting Mandelson in jail. 😄

Be careful what you wish for. 😂

Really Johnny - are you that simple ?

Who are these Lefties - I'm guessing that for you it's anyone who doesn't support Trump ? (who is after all, uniquely devious and without any vestige of honour).

Don't be too cocky - Trump is buried in disgrace on matters Epstein and his comeuppance seems to be on the way . . .

So YOU be careful what you wish for too !

(BTW, the McSweeney demise shows that unlike the USA, in the UK there are still standards in public life).

18 minutes ago, TorquayFan said:

Who are these Lefties - I'm guessing that for you it's anyone who doesn't support Trump ? (who is after all, uniquely devious and without any vestige of honour).

Many on this forum Thorquayfan.

Crying for Trump to release them (even though Biden didn't) and saying he wouldn't because it would bring him down.

Then he releases them and who is implicated? Mandelson, Starmer, Gates, Clinton etc.

Maybe one day (if you weren't so simple) you can finally work out why Biden kept them under wraps. 😄

Take no notice of the Trump loving Farage.

He is wrong about almost everything and certainly this story.

It seems that Britain has people who feel some responsibility. I haven't seen anyone else who has taken action.

3 hours ago, TorquayFan said:

(BTW, the McSweeney demise shows that unlike the USA, in the UK there are still standards in public life).

I'm not so sure there are still a reasonable level of standards in UK public life. How come any politician thinks it's okay to lie, cheat, have these snouts in the trough and have parties whilst the elderly die in their thousands because the politicians failed to do the obvious? Or, to leak trade secrets and accept 'unrecalled' gifts for favours passed? We could discuss whose politicians are higher or lower on the scale of 'standards'. To me it's still a race to the bottom, alongside the race to find a fall guy/gal/scapegoat for poor behaviour or decisions made, whether it be the decision to use Mandelson or to post a racist message on social media. McSweeney is just a scapegoat. He might have a high degree of responsibility, but the accountability lies with Starmer, same responsibility/accountability trail for any racist tweet on any social media platform's account.

Jonny F - Both Hilary and Bill Clinton have offered to testify in an open Senate Hearing but Trump has panicked at the prospect. Starmer is NOT implicated in the Epstein files at all - just accused of bad judgement because of Mandelson's links with Epstein.

And you posted - "Maybe one day (if you weren't so simple) you can finally work out why Biden kept them under wraps".

Not correct - matters were 'sub judice' - Biden did not hush them up. TTBOMKAB

Wattana - yes standards in UK public life are far from perfect but it's fair to point out the difference in the USA - Trump comes over as 100% corrupt !

Would any PM resign with such a huge majority ?

8 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

The UK voting public had the chance in 2011 to replace FPTP with AV. They resoundingly rejected the change in the national referendum.

That's because it was offered instead of the real reform which most wanted, which was proportional representation. Meaning that the number of seats a party gets in parliament reflects the percentage of the vote they got. How can anyone who's a democrat be against that? Well the UK establishment is anything BUT democratic.

The establishment won through with trickery again. The only option if you wanted PR was to say no to AV - which is really just a bastardized form of FPTP anyway, usually resulting in the least hated being elected. Which is why it was offered, in the knowledge it would be indeed defeated.

Starmer has the seats (ridiculous as that in itself is on 30 odd % of the vote) to get PR through. He won't because 'Labour' is now the establishment, and to the right of Ted Heath's Tories. They want all the power and aren't willing to share it even in the country's interests. Just look at all the Blairite detritus running 'Labour' and the country today. Mandelson? Cooper? The list is almost endless. I'm a lefty but 'Labour' would never get my vote in its current iteration. The UK needs a genuine social democratic party.

So make no mistake: the country is in the state it is in because this is what the electorate votes for and obviously wants, time and again. These people aren't beamed down from space. They are chosen by every single one of the UK electorate who are happy to put up with the ridiculous electoral system, and until that sinks in absolutely nothing will change; decline will continue 'apace'.

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Rats fighting in a sack.

Ironic that the lefties thought the Epstein files would bring down Trump and now they look to be bringing down Starmer and putting Mandelson in jail. 😄

Be careful what you wish for. 😂

I wish for both. So far got 50%.

46 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Would any PM resign with such a huge majority ?

No. But his 'majority' does not reflect the number of votes 'he' got. That's because the establishment sleight of hand here is to hold synchronized local elections every few years, instead of a genuine national general election, where the votes a party gets decides how many seats it gets. It doesn't get much more democratic than that.

It means individual candidates are elected for local issues and not national. It yields ridiculous results like Starmer's 30% giving him a 140 seat overall majority. He ain't gonna give that up is he? And neither will Farage next time round but that might just give the impetus for genuine 'reform'.

The UK needs a system where you can vote for a local candidate AND a party. But the establishment won't give you that and many don't even realize it's possible and works very well elsewhere.

However you all seem to be happy with things otherwise you'd actually change them. It's not as if you have to face off against the Stasi is it?

16 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Would any PM resign with such a huge majority ?

Dignity?

Decency?

Self respect?

16 hours ago, BusyB said:

No. But his 'majority' does not reflect the number of votes 'he' got. That's because the establishment sleight of hand here is to hold synchronized local elections every few years, instead of a genuine national general election, where the votes a party gets decides how many seats it gets. It doesn't get much more democratic than that.

It means individual candidates are elected for local issues and not national. It yields ridiculous results like Starmer's 30% giving him a 140 seat overall majority. He ain't gonna give that up is he? And neither will Farage next time round but that might just give the impetus for genuine 'reform'.

The UK needs a system where you can vote for a local candidate AND a party. But the establishment won't give you that and many don't even realize it's possible and works very well elsewhere.

However you all seem to be happy with things otherwise you'd actually change them. It's not as if you have to face off against the Stasi is it?

That is a spectacularly twisted and inaccurate representation of British elections.

6 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

That is a spectacularly twisted and inaccurate representation of British elections.

In countries with proportional representation you vote for the party/person who (most at least) offers the kind of country you want to live in.

In the UK you vote for someone you don't want to keep someone else out. And wonder afterwards why the place is in a mess. 😉

On 2/9/2026 at 12:25 PM, TorquayFan said:

Jonny F - Both Hilary and Bill Clinton have offered to testify in an open Senate Hearing but Trump has panicked at the prospect.

Or more accurately...

After months of legal resistance, the Clintons agreed to the terms in early February 2026 to avoid being held in criminal contempt of Congress.

They have agreed to testify in an open hearing - isn't that enough?

On 2/10/2026 at 8:17 AM, JonnyF said:

Dignity?

Decency?

Self respect?

Your halo is in the post.

4 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Your halo is in the post.

Yours is in the dirt.

But this post is about Starmer not me or you.

16 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Yours is in the dirt.

But this post is about Starmer not me or you.

16 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Yours is in the dirt.

But this post is about Starmer not me or you.

Lighten up, and have a nice day.