LONDON — Keir Starmer will strive for “maximum transparency” when releasing files on Peter Mandelson’s appointment as British ambassador to the U.S., a senior U.K. minister said Wednesday. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the prime minister wants to release as much information into the public domain about how Mandelson was appointed, his correspondence with ministers and his subsequent sacking last September over the former Labour peer’s friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. “The prime minister’s going for maximum transparency here,” Streeting, a former friend of Mandelson, told Sky, though added the PM is “obviously drawing a line” by “not releasing information where it might compromise our national security and our security services, or where there may be information in there that might undermine international relations with other countries.” The opposition Conservatives have put forward a humble address — a parliamentary message to King Charles that was favored by Starmer during his time as leader of the opposition — calling for “all papers” relating to Mandelson’s appointment last year to be published. These include “due diligence which was passed to Number 10,” conflict of interest forms over his work in Russia and China, and correspondence (including electronic communications) between Mandelson, ministers and the PM’s Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney — who encouraged Starmer to send the then Labour peer to Washington. The government has published an amendment to the address accepting the Tories’ request, with the caveat that it will exclude “papers prejudicial to U.K. national security or international relations.” U.K. lawmakers will debate the substance of what should be released this afternoon. “What we’ve seen in recent days also is a prime minister acting rapidly to make sure that Peter Mandelson is stripped of all of the titles and privileges that were conferred on him through public service,” Streeting told the BBC, calling his behavior “so jaw-droppingly stupid and outrageous.” The Metropolitan Police confirmed Tuesday evening that Mandelson is under investigation for alleged misconduct in public office after it appeared he leaked sensitive government discussions at the height of the financial crisis to the late financier. Mandelson didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the investigation on Tuesday evening. He has previously said he was wrong to have continued his association with Epstein and apologized “unequivocally” to Epstein’s victims. And in a Times Newspaper interview that was conducted before the most recent batch of Epstein files were released, Mandelson attempted to explain his historic association with the disgraced financier. “I don’t know what his motives were — probably mixed — but he provided guidance to help me navigate out of the world of politics and into the world of commerce and finance,” Mandelson told the newspaper. Mandelson didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the investigation on Tuesday evening. Mandelson also resigned from the House of Lords and left Labour following the latest tranche of correspondence in the Epstein Files.

LONDON — Keir Starmer will draft a new law to strip Peter Mandelson of his right to sit in Britain’s House of Lords after new revelations about the former British ambassador to Washington’s links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein appeared in the Epstein files. The British prime minister has asked officials to draft legislation to remove Mandelson from the House of Lords “as quickly as possible,” his spokesman told reporters Tuesday afternoon. No.10 Downing Street said the Cabinet Office has also referred material to the police after the newly released files appeared to show Mandelson sharing live government policy deliberations with the disgraced financier.  The Metropolitan Police said Monday it is reviewing allegations of misconduct in a public office. Starmer’s spokesperson said the Epstein file documents “contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and official activities thereafter to stabilize the economy.” “Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information, [with] strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially,” the spokesperson said, adding: “It appears these safeguards were compromised.” Mandelson, a former Labour Cabinet minister who twice had to resign from Tony Blair’s government, was given a seat in the House of Lords by Gordon Brown in 2008 — a move which allowed Brown to appoint him as business secretary. More recently, the peer was made U.S. ambassador by Starmer as he sought to build strong ties with Donald Trump’s administration. The British prime minister sacked Mandelson last year after the release of U.S. Department of Justice files which shed new light on Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein. The former ambassador quit the ruling Labour Party on Sunday— but Starmer is under mounting political pressure to go further. Starmer “regards it as ridiculous that a peerage cannot be removed, except with primary legislation, something that has not happened since 1917,” his spokesman said Tuesday. “The prime minister believes there is a broader need for the House of Lords to be able to remove transgressors more quickly,” the spokesperson added. Downing Street has called for cross party support for its bid to modernize the unelected House of Lords. Currently peers can retire from the upper chamber — but they cannot be removed.

LONDON — Peter Mandelson said he has nothing new to tell U.S. lawmakers about Jeffrey Epstein, as he branded his sacking as Britain’s Ambassador to Washington over his links to the convicted sex offender a “life-changing crisis.” “There is nothing I can tell Congress about Epstein they don’t already know,” he told the Times in an interview published Monday night. “I had no exposure to the criminal aspects of his life,” he added. Britain’s Metropolitan Police said Monday it is reviewing reports relating to alleged misconduct in a public office. Newly-released Epstein files appear to suggest Mandelson passed information from inside the U.K. government to the convicted sex offender while he was business secretary. In the same Times interview, Mandelson, who twice resigned from the New Labour government, said being sacked as U.S. ambassador last September “felt like being killed without actually dying.” “I’ve had a lot of bad luck, no doubt some of it of my own making,” he said. The Times interview was conducted on January 25 — before the latest tranche of documents was published – and the paper also spoke to Mandelson on Sunday. U.K. minister Karin Smyth, speaking for the U.K. government on Tuesday morning, criticized Mandelson’s lack of self-awareness. “I’m sure you’ve seen and interviewed over time, men that have been involved in similar sorts of behavior, seem to not be able to recognize their own self in that,” Smith told Sky News presenter Sophy Ridge. Smith said Mandelson should testify before U.S. Congress, if asked, adding: “Anybody who’s got information should support the investigation, should be as open as they can be.” Newly released Epstein files appear to show Mandelson shared sensitive government policy decisions with the disgraced financier. They also suggest Epstein made payments linked to Mandelson. Mandelson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He has previously said he was wrong to have continued his association with Epstein and apologized “unequivocally” to Epstein’s victims. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has asked Cabinet Secretary Chris Wormald to investigate the apparent government leaks. Politicians from across the political spectrum have called on Mandelson, who resigned from Labour, to retire or be removed from the House of Lords.

LONDON — Jeffrey Epstein had access to highly-sensitive British government policy discussions at the height of the global financial crisis, emails disclosed in the Epstein files show. Epstein, already a convicted sex offender at the time, was forwarded on a June 2009 email written by then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s senior policy adviser Nick Butler about the government’s response to the banking crunch — addressed to “Gordon.” It appears the note was sent on by-then Business Secretary Peter Mandelson, who is facing a fresh round of scrutiny over his links to Epstein. The note — disclosed in the latest U.S. Department of Justice releases on Epstein — highlighted the U.K.’s “very substantial asset base,” and said Britain had “saleable assets in hand which are not strategic.” The correspondence covers Whitehall thinking at the time of a major economic crisis, and it is highly unusual for such top-level discussions to be circulated outside of the British government. The exchange took place a year after Epstein, the late financier, pled guilty to solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18. In the chain, Mandelson wrote: “Interesting note that’s gone to the PM.” Epstein replied: “What salable assets?” The message by Butler was also sent to Brown’s key civil service aide Jeremy Heywood, his Private Secretary Christina Scott and Parliamentary Secretary to the Cabinet Office Shriti Vadera. There is no suggestion any of them were aware the exchange would be forwarded on to Epstein. Mandelson — who was sacked as Britain’s ambassador to Washington in September after emails emerged showing he sent supportive messages to Epstein while the financier was facing charges for soliciting a minor in 2008 — did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He has previously said he was wrong to have continued his association with Epstein and apologized “unequivocally” to Epstein’s victims. A separate email, sent to Epstein in August 2009, highlighted notes from Heywood and Vadera about business investment and the Bank of England’s priorities. The identity of the person who forwarded this exchange to Epstein is redacted. Mandelson is already facing fresh domestic pressure to exit public life. He resigned from the Labour Party Sunday evening after documents appeared to show that Epstein made payments amounting to $75,000 to accounts linked to the Labour peer between 2003 and 2004. Mandelson said he has no record or recollection of receiving the alleged payments from Epstein and did not know if the documents were authentic. Keir Starmer has asked his top civil servant Chris Wormald to “urgently” review all the available information regarding Mandelson’s contact with Epstein during his period as a government minister, the British prime minister’s spokesman told reporters Monday. No. 10 Downing Street also said Mandelson should no longer be a member of the House of Lords, or use his title.

Prime minister’s questions: a shouty, jeery, very occasionally useful advert for British politics. Here’s what you need to know from the latest session in POLITICO’s weekly run-through. What they sparred about: Keir Starmer escaped from all his domestic troubles by jetting off to China, so Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy was left to fend off questions from disgruntled MPs both in front of (and behind) him. Tory Leader Kemi Badenoch carried on rotating which frontbencher batted for the Conservatives, handing that dubious honor to Shadow Business Secretary Andrew Griffith. Given his brief, er, business rates dominated. Hold my beer: Griffith led on the government’s U-turn watering down business rate costs for pubs, asking Lammy to confirm that more than 90 percent of “retail, hospitality and leisure businesses will get nothing.” The deputy PM, you may not be surprised to read, swerved that interrogation and said it is “always a pleasure to hear from the co-author of the mini-budget” — Liz Truss’ economic proposals, which led to her swift departure from No 10. Drink: The PM may be out of the country, but it wouldn’t be PMQs without a mention of Britain’s shortest serving prime minister — the person Labour thinks is still the Tories’ biggest electoral liability nearly three-and-a-half years after she left office. Last orders: The shadow business secretary bigged up his experience, unsurprisingly, in business, contrasting that with Lammy’s 25 years “manufacturing grievance.” Nonetheless, Griffith claimed the help is “too little, too late” with striking visual imagery, arguing “our high streets are bleeding out and the chancellor’s handing out a box of sticking plasters.” Out of the till: Lammy may have had little notice that Griffith was stepping into the blue hot seat, but his aides did their homework. The deputy PM ripped into Griffith opposing the minimum wage. Best of enemies: Griffith had plenty of barbs up his sleeve too, labeling his opposite number “left behind Lammy” for not getting a cushty trip to Beijing. But the already depleted Tory benches were even quieter than usual, making it harder for the PMQs novice’s lines to land. That said: He managed a good line about “Andy from Manchester having his dreams crushed by Labour,” a reference to the Greater Manchester mayor getting blocked from standing in the Gorton and Denton by-election over fears he might challenge Starmer for the top job (though, of course, Labour would deny that). “It is our party that is getting stronger,” Griffith cried unironically to shrieks of laughter from the government benches. Indeed, the polls beg to differ. Crossing the line: As usual with these exchanges, the substance of support (or lack thereof) for businesses was lost after about question two. Lammy concluded his responses by highlighting that Badenoch praised the art of queuing during her appearance on the long-running BBC “Desert Island Discs” radio program. It was too easy for Lammy to argue Tory MPs took her at her word after three defections just this month. Helpful backbench intervention of the week: Rugby MP John Slinger continued meeting his ultra-loyalist stereotype by commending Labour’s record on the NHS and slipping in criticism of Reform’s health policies. Lammy couldn’t have been happier, joyously reiterating the point made by every Labour politician that the NHS is only safe under them. Totally unscientific scores on the doors: Lammy 8/10. Griffith 6/10. It was unsurprising for the Tories to lead on a U-turn, given there were many to choose from. However, despite business rates being Griffith’s area of expertise, he did not make his point land. Good lines from both sides meant the session became a battle of which voices could shout the loudest. Given the government’s parliamentary majority, there could only be one winner.

LONDON — The U.K. Conservatives want to ditch their reputation for psychodrama. That might be easier said than done. Kemi Badenoch on Wednesday called a punchy press conference in London to claim the Conservatives are “a party of serious people” — despite seeing three of her MPs defect to Nigel Farage’s Reform UK just this month. The Tories were brutally ousted from office in 2024 after years of plotting and in-fighting which saw the party led by five different prime ministers after the 2016 Brexit vote.  Badenoch now claims only her party can be trusted to govern the country competently. The Tories are “a party of serious people, not drama queens,” she said. Voters — and her own MPs — are not yet convinced. Badenoch continues to languish in the polls, and ex-Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick, veteran MP Andrew Rosindell and former Home Secretary Suella Braverman have all jumped ship to Reform UK this month claiming Britain is broken thanks to the Conservatives. The Tory leader laid into those former colleagues, accusing them of having “a tantrum dressed up as politics.” “I’m sorry you didn’t win the leadership contest. I’m sorry you didn’t get a job in the shadow cabinet. I’m sorry you didn’t get into the Lords,” Badenoch said, accusing them of “not offering a plan to fix this country.” Badenoch also jumped on in-fighting in the ruling Labour Party, accusing its MPs of “scheming to get in a new contender to challenge the prime minister.” Keir Starmer faced a backlash from some of his MPs after stopping Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, who has been critical of the PM, from applying for selection in a crucial Westminster by-election. Burnham’s candidacy was blocked by Labour’s ruling body Sunday to the disgruntlement of left-wing MPs. “Everyone is fed up with this style of politics,” Badenoch said. “We are right, they are all wrong,” she said. A Labour Party spokesperson rejected the new calm characterization, saying: “The public will not trust arsonists complaining about the fire they set. The Conservatives are not serious, they’re not sorry, and are too consumed with holding together their terminally broken party.”

LONDON —  Keir Starmer lands in China trying to do everything at once. As his government searches desperately for economic growth, the prime minister’s policy is to cooperate, compete with, and, where appropriate, challenge the Asian superpower. That’s easier said than done. POLITICO asked five China analysts — ranging from former government ministers to ex-diplomats — to give their honest take on how the British PM should handle the days ahead. DON’T LECTURE — VINCE CABLE, FORMER BUSINESS SECRETARY Vince Cable, who visited China three times as U.K. business secretary between 2010 and 2015, says Starmer must not give Chinese President Xi Jinping public lectures. It will be tempting, given China’s human rights record. U.K. lawmakers are particularly concerned about Beijing’s treatment of Uyghur Muslims and Hong Kongers. “From experience, that just antagonizes people. They’ll respond in kind and will remind us about all the bad things the British have done throughout our history. You’ll get absolutely nowhere,” Cable, a former Liberal Democrat leader who wrote “The Chinese Conundrum: Engagement or Conflict” after leaving office, said.  Raising concerns in private is more likely to get a positive result, he thinks. “Although I’m by no means an admirer of President [Donald] Trump … his approach, which is business-like and uses actually quite respectful language in public, has actually had far more success in dealing with the Chinese than the traditional missionary approach of some Western European countries,” Cable adds.  LISTEN AND SPEAK UP — BEN BLAND, CHATHAM HOUSE ASIA-PACIFIC PROGRAM DIRECTOR Ben Bland, director of the Chatham House think tank’s Asia-Pacific program, warns there can’t be a return to the “naive optimism” of the “golden era” under Cameron. Britain should “listen to the Chinese leadership and try and understand more about how [Chinese President] Xi Jinping and other senior communist leaders see the world, how they see China,” the former Financial Times South China correspondent says. “The U.K.’s ability to influence China directly is quite limited, but it’s really important that we understand what they’re trying to do in the world.” Starmer should be clear about the U.K.’s red lines on espionage, interference in British society, and the harassment of people living in this country, Bland says. Vince Cable, who visited China three times as U.K. business secretary between 2010 and 2015, says Starmer must not give Chinese President Xi Jinping public lectures. | Andy Rain/EPA TREAT TRADE CAUTIOUSLY — CHARLES PARTON, FORMER DIPLOMAT “The Chinese are adept at the propaganda of these visits, and ensuring that everything seems wonderful,” Charles Parton, an ex-diplomat who was First Counsellor to the EU Delegation in Beijing between 2011 and 2016, warns.   “There’s an awful lot of strange counting going on of [investment] deals that have already been signed, deals that are on the cards to be signed [and] deals that are glimmers in the eye and almost certainly won’t be signed,” Parton, now an adviser to the Council on Geostrategy think tank, says. “Trade is highly fungible. It’s not political,” Parton, who is also a senior associate at the Royal United Services Institute, adds. “We shouldn’t be saying to ourselves ‘oh my gosh, we better knuckle down to whatever the Chinese want of us, because otherwise our trade and investment will suffer’,” he believes. “If you can push through trade investment which is beneficial — excellent. That’s great, but let’s not think that this is the be-all and end-all,” he warns. SEE CHINA AS IT IS — LUKE DE PULFORD, INTER-PARLIAMENTARY ALLIANCE ON CHINA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR  Luke De Pulford, executive director of the hawkish global cross-party Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, is skeptical about the timing of Starmer’s China trip —  a week after ministers gave planning approval for Beijing’s controversial mega embassy in London. “Going to China against that backdrop, to look as if you’re going to make national security concessions in the hope of economic preferment, is unwise,” he says. He is also doubtful that closer ties with Beijing will improve the British economy. “All of the evidence seems to point towards China investing in the U.K. only in as far as it suits their strategic interests,” De Pulford says. “There’s a lot to lose and not very much to gain.”  Prioritizing the U.K. agenda will be paramount for Starmer. “There’s nothing wrong at all with visiting China if you’re going to represent your interests and the United Kingdom’s interests,” he says, while remaining doubtful that this will be achieved. SET OUT A CHINA STRATEGY — EVIE ASPINALL, BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY GROUP DIRECTOR  Securing a “symbolic, long-term relationship” with China should be a priority for Starmer, Evie Aspinall, who leads the non-partisan British Foreign Policy Group think tank, says. She wants the U.K.’s China Audit to be published in full, warning businesses “don’t have a strong understanding of what the U.K.’s approach is.”  The audit was launched in late 2024 to allow the government to understand Beijing’s threats and opportunities, but its findings have not been published in detail because much of its content is classified. “I think that’s a fundamental limitation,” Aspinall says, pointing out it is businesses which will generate the growth Starmer wants.  U.K. businesses need to know they “will be supported around some of those risks if they do decide to engage more closely with China,” she says.   

LONDON — Keir Starmer has been throwing a little shade at fellow world leaders. The British prime minister ditched his buttoned-up public persona on Monday evening to poke fun at France’s Emmanuel Macron during a live recording of comedian Matt Forde’s podcast. Handed a pair of aviator sunglasses, similar to those worn by the French president during the World Economic Forum in Davos last week due to an eye health issue, Starmer put them on and jibed to audience laughter: “Bonjour.” The clip was posted on the PM’s TikTok feed with a message to Macron saying: “Talk to me, Goose” — a reference to the 1986 Tom Cruise film “Top Gun.” > @keirstarmer @Emmanuel Macron ♬ original sound – Keir Starmer Starmer told Forde that while he will consider wearing the specs to international summits, he will need his normal glasses back to be able to see in parliament. It’s not the first time Macron’s shades have raised eyebrows. “I watched him yesterday with those beautiful sunglasses. What the hell happened?” Donald Trump remarked during a speech at Davos. Starmer also disclosed that Trump regularly rings him on his mobile phone, rather than using official government communications. “Once I was in the flat with the kids cleaning pasta off the table after their dinner, and the phone goes and it’s Donald on the phone,” Starmer said. “Another time, I’d say most inconvenient, we’re halfway through the Arsenal-PSG game,” he added, referencing his love of the top-flight soccer team. In a more serious moment, Starmer defended his decision to travel to China this week, in the first trip to the country by a British prime minister since 2018. “If you’re a leader on the international stage, you are dealing with whoever is the leader in another country. I mean, it’s that simple,” he said.  

LONDON — Former Conservative Home Secretary Suella Braverman defected to Reform UK Monday. Braverman, who served as the U.K.’s chief interior minister between 2022 and 2023, is the third Tory MP to leave the party this month. She told an audience of war veterans at a Reform UK event: “I feel like I’ve come home.” The MP for Fareham and Waterlooville follows former Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick and veteran right-winger Andrew Rosindell in joining Nigel Farage’s populist force this month. She ran unsuccessfully to lead the Conservatives in 2022 after Boris Johnson’s resignation as prime minister. This developing story is being updated.

LONDON — British politicians condemned Donald Trump’s assertion that fellow NATO members stayed away from the frontlines during the war in Afghanistan. In his latest swipe at European allies, the U.S. president told Fox News he wasn’t “sure” the alliance would “be there if we ever needed them.” And he added: “We’ve never needed them. They’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan … and they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” Britain lost 457 troops in Afghanistan, while 165 Canadians died and Denmark lost 44 soldiers, the highest per-head death toll during the two decade war. NATO invoked its Article 5 on collective security for the first and only time in its history after the 9/11 attacks against the U.S. Health Minister Stephen Kinnock told Sky News Friday Trump’s remarks were “deeply disappointing, there is no other way to say that.” Kinnock said he did not believe “there’s any basis for him to make those comments.” The minister added that “anybody who seeks to criticize what they [British troops] have done and the sacrifices that they make is plainly wrong.” He told the BBC it was “best at this time not to be distracted by comments that simply don’t really bear any resemblance to the reality.” BACKBENCHER BACKLASH The remarks cap a difficult week for transatlantic relations, with Trump threatening to impose trade tariffs on Britain over its support for Greenland before retreating, and also attacking London’s deal over the future of the Chagos Islands. Emily Thornberry, the Labour chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, called Trump’s words on Afghanistan “so much more than a mistake,” branding them an “absolute insult” to the bereaved families of victims. Lib Dem Leader Ed Davey, one of the U.S. president’s fiercest critics, said Trump “avoided military service five times,” and asked “how dare he question their sacrifice?” MPs who formerly served in Afghanistan also weighed. Labour MP Calvin Bailey, previously a Royal Air Force officer, said the comment “bears no resemblance to the reality experienced by those of us who served there.” Conservative parliamentarian Ben Obese-Jecty, a former British Army captain, said he was “sad to see our nation’s sacrifice, and that of our NATO partners, held so cheaply by the president of the United States.”