British PM Starmer vows to fight for his job after furore about former ambassador’s Epstein ties

British Prime Min­is­ter Keir Starmer vowed Mon­day to fight for his job as rev­e­la­tions about the re­la­tion­ship be­tween the for­mer U.K. am­bas­sador to Wash­ing­ton and Jef­frey Ep­stein spi­ralled in­to a full-blown cri­sis for his 19-month-old gov­ern­ment.

The prime min­is­ter’s au­thor­i­ty with his own Labour Par­ty has been bat­tered by fall­out from the pub­li­ca­tion of files re­lat­ed to Ep­stein — a man he nev­er met and whose sex­u­al mis­con­duct has not im­pli­cat­ed Starmer.

Some law­mak­ers in Starmer’s cen­tre-left Labour Par­ty have called on him to re­sign for his judg­ment in ap­point­ing Pe­ter Man­del­son to the high-pro­file diplo­mat­ic post in 2024, de­spite his ties to the con­vict­ed sex of­fend­er.

The leader of the Labour Par­ty in Scot­land, Anas Sar­war, joined those calls Mon­day, say­ing “there have been too many mis­takes” and “the lead­er­ship in Down­ing Street has to change.”

Starmer’s chief of staff and his com­mu­ni­ca­tions di­rec­tor al­so have quit in quick suc­ces­sion. But Starmer in­sist­ed he will not step down.

“Every fight I have ever been in, I’ve won,” he told Labour law­mak­ers at a meet­ing in Par­lia­ment.

“I’m not pre­pared to walk away from my man­date and my re­spon­si­bil­i­ty to my coun­try,” he added.

Af­ter Sar­war spoke, se­nior col­leagues — in­clud­ing those tipped as po­ten­tial chal­lengers — ral­lied to sup­port Starmer. Deputy Prime Min­is­ter David Lam­my wrote on X:

“We should let noth­ing dis­tract us from our mis­sion to change Britain and we sup­port the Prime Min­is­ter in do­ing that.”

For­eign Sec­re­tary Yvette Coop­er post­ed:

“At this cru­cial time for the world, we need his lead­er­ship not just at home but on the glob­al stage.”

For­mer Deputy Prime Min­is­ter An­gela Rayn­er, a po­ten­tial suc­ces­sor, said Starmer “has my full sup­port.”

Sup­port­ive law­mak­ers said Starmer won over a restive crowd when he ad­dressed scores of Labour mem­bers of Par­lia­ment Mon­day evening be­hind closed doors.

“Of course, there were tough mo­ments,” leg­is­la­tor Chris Cur­tis said. “But he re­al­ly brought the room round.”

Starmer has apol­o­gized

Starmer fired Man­del­son last Sep­tem­ber af­ter emails were pub­lished show­ing that he main­tained a friend­ship with Ep­stein af­ter the fi­nancier’s 2008 con­vic­tion for sex of­fens­es in­volv­ing a mi­nor.

Crit­ics say Starmer should have known bet­ter than to ap­point Man­del­son in the first place. The 72-year-old Labour politi­cian is a con­tentious fig­ure whose ca­reer has been tar­nished with scan­dals over mon­ey or ethics.

A new trove of Ep­stein files re­leased by au­thor­i­ties in the Unit­ed States last week re­vealed more de­tails about the re­la­tion­ship and put new pres­sure on Starmer.

Starmer apol­o­gized last week to Ep­stein’s vic­tims and said he was sor­ry for “hav­ing be­lieved Man­del­son’s lies.”

He promised to re­lease doc­u­men­ta­tion re­lat­ed to Man­del­son’s ap­point­ment, which the gov­ern­ment says will show that Man­del­son mis­led of­fi­cials about his ties to Ep­stein. But pub­li­ca­tion of the doc­u­ments could be weeks away. They must be vet­ted on na­tion­al se­cu­ri­ty grounds and for po­ten­tial con­flicts with a po­lice in­ves­ti­ga­tion.

Po­lice are in­ves­ti­gat­ing Man­del­son for po­ten­tial mis­con­duct in pub­lic of­fice over doc­u­ments sug­gest­ing he passed sen­si­tive gov­ern­ment in­for­ma­tion to Ep­stein a decade and a half ago. The of­fense car­ries a max­i­mum sen­tence of life in prison.

Man­del­son has not been ar­rest­ed or charged, and he does not face any al­le­ga­tions of sex­u­al mis­con­duct.

Chief of staff took the fall

Starmer’s chief of staff, Mor­gan Mc­Sweeney, took the fall for the de­ci­sion to give Man­del­son the job by quit­ting on Sun­day.

He said he “ad­vised the prime min­is­ter to make that ap­point­ment, and I take full re­spon­si­bil­i­ty for that ad­vice.”

Mc­Sweeney has been Starmer’s most im­por­tant aide since he be­came Labour leader in 2020 and is con­sid­ered a key ar­chi­tect of Labour’s land­slide Ju­ly 2024 elec­tion vic­to­ry. But some in the par­ty blame him for a se­ries of mis­steps since then.

Some Labour of­fi­cials hope that his de­par­ture will buy the prime min­is­ter time to re­build trust with the par­ty and the coun­try.

Se­nior law­mak­er Emi­ly Thorn­ber­ry said Mc­Sweeney had be­come a “di­vi­sive fig­ure” and his de­par­ture brought the op­por­tu­ni­ty for a re­set.

She said Starmer is “a good leader in that he is strong and clear. I think that he needs to step up a bit more than he has.”

Oth­ers say Mc­Sweeney’s de­par­ture leaves Starmer weak and iso­lat­ed.

Op­po­si­tion calls to re­sign

Op­po­si­tion Con­ser­v­a­tive Par­ty leader Ke­mi Bade­noch said Starmer “has made bad de­ci­sion af­ter bad de­ci­sion” and “his po­si­tion now is un­ten­able.”

Since win­ning of­fice, Starmer has strug­gled to de­liv­er promised eco­nom­ic growth, re­pair tat­tered pub­lic ser­vices and ease the cost of liv­ing. He pledged a re­turn to hon­est gov­ern­ment af­ter 14 years of scan­dal-tarred Con­ser­v­a­tive rule but has been be­set by mis­steps and U-turns over wel­fare cuts and oth­er un­pop­u­lar poli­cies.

Labour con­sis­tent­ly lags be­hind the hard-right Re­form UK par­ty in opin­ion polls, and its fail­ure to im­prove had sparked talk of a lead­er­ship chal­lenge, even be­fore the Man­del­son rev­e­la­tions.

Un­der Britain’s par­lia­men­tary sys­tem, prime min­is­ters can change with­out the need for a na­tion­al elec­tion. If Starmer is chal­lenged or re­signs, it will trig­ger an elec­tion for the Labour lead­er­ship. The win­ner would be­come prime min­is­ter.

The Con­ser­v­a­tives went through three prime min­is­ters be­tween na­tion­al elec­tions in 2019 and 2024, in­clud­ing Liz Truss, who last­ed just 49 days in of­fice.

Starmer was elect­ed on a promise to end the po­lit­i­cal chaos that roiled the Con­ser­v­a­tives’ fi­nal years in pow­er.

Labour law­mak­er Clive Ef­ford said Starmer’s crit­ics should “be care­ful what you wish for.”

“I don’t think peo­ple took to the changes in prime min­is­ter when the To­ries were in pow­er,” he told the BBC. “It didn’t do them any good.” —LON­DON (AP)

_______

Sto­ry by JILL LAW­LESS | As­so­ci­at­ed Press