It was like a knife through my soul: Stepping out of the shadows, Starmer's ex-chief of staff takes blame for picking Mandy

By MARTIN BECKFORD, POLICY EDITOR and JASON GROVES, POLITICAL EDITOR Published: 00:07, 29 April 2026 | Updated: 00:23, 29 April 2026 The man behind Sir Keir Starmer's rise to power finally stepped out of the shadows on Tuesday. Morgan McSweeney, the Prime Minister's ex-chief of staff, answered questions from Parliament's foreign affairs committee about his role in Peter Mandelson's selection as US ambassador. His four hours of evidence came after former Foreign Office mandarin Sir Philip Barton faced MPs. This is what we learned. Mr McSweeney opened his evidence with a brief personal statement in which he tried to shift the blame for Mandelson's appointment away from Sir Keir. 'The appointment of Mandelson as ambassador was a serious error of judgment,' he said.  'I advised the Prime Minister in support of that appointment and I was wrong to do so. As I said in my resignation statement, I resigned because I believe responsibility should rest with those who make serious mistakes. Accountability in public life cannot apply only when it is convenient. 'The Prime Minister relied on my advice and I got it wrong.' Morgan McSweeney, the Prime Minister's ex-chief of staff, answered questions from Parliament's foreign affairs committee about his role in Peter Mandelson's selection as US ambassador on Tuesday Sir Keir Starmer is pictured during a visit to Kenton United Synagogue on April 23, 2026 It emerged Sir Keir made the decision to pick Mandelson as US ambassador at a meeting with his aides on or around December 15, 2024 – days before it was announced. The other attendees were national security adviser Jonathan Powell and the Prime Minister's private secretary Nin Pandit. MPs were told that the four debated the pros and cons of the appointment before the decision was made. The Prime Minister asked Mr McSweeney to quiz Mandelson on his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein after due diligence documents warned they were 'particularly close'. The former chief of staff suggested initially he did not fully believe him, saying: 'I didn't feel that I got (the truth) back from him. But it wasn't my decision. It was the Prime Minister's decision and he saw the DV (developed vetting) as part of that decision.' But he later said he 'thought he had told the truth' and would never have allowed the appointment if he thought Mandelson might be lying. Describing his horror when it emerged in September 2025 that Mandelson had been far closer to Epstein than he claimed, Mr McSweeney said 'it was like a knife through my soul'. The peer had told the paedophile 'I think the world of you' just before he was jailed for soliciting sex from a minor, Bloomberg revealed.  Mr McSweeney said the truth 'was way, way, way worse than I had expected at the time, and it was when I saw the pictures, when I saw the Bloomberg questions in September 2025, I have to say it was like a knife through my soul'. He suggested some ministers and officials are re-writing history by claiming they warned against appointing Mandelson. He said: 'If everyone else was opposed to this appointment but me, (Sir Keir) would not have made it.' But he added: 'I could see that there were pros and cons in the appointment and I worried it would go wrong, so I didn't try to push anything through.' In his earlier session with MPs, Sir Philip Barton revealed he was not asked whether Mandelson should be picked The appointment of Lord Mandelson has brought Starmer to the brink (The pair are pictured together on February 27, 2025) Mr McSweeney admitted it would have been 'very embarrassing' if Mandelson had failed his vetting after being appointed, but said there was 'no Plan B'. He added that, despite well-known concerns about Mandelson's links to Epstein, China and Russia, the question of whether he would pass vetting 'did not jump out to me as a problem'. The former chief of staff said the idea of appointing the peer to Washington was first suggested 'by Mandelson himself'. And he revealed Sir Keir decided in opposition he wanted to make a political appointment to the role, but waited until after the US presidential election in 2024 to do so.  Due diligence was carried out on both Mandelson and former Tory chancellor George Osborne, he explained, with the former winning approval because of his experience in trade negotiations. A total of 15 Labour MPs voted against the Government during the debate, according to the official division list. Mr McSweeney denied reports he was in thrall to Mandelson. He acknowledged he had grown close to the New Labour grandee, but said he did not regularly seek his advice until 2021. 'I didn't regard him as my mentor,' he added, and also denied claims Mandelson was his 'hero'. Downing Street tried to find an ambassadorial role for ex-Labour spin chief Matthew Doyle, Mr McSweeney revealed. But he denied this amounted to 'jobs for the boys', saying it was good management for Sir Keir to try to find a 'softer landing'. Mr McSweeney denied he had deliberately given the police the wrong address when his mobile phone was snatched in the street. 'I was adrenalised, and if I gave any wrong direction, it wasn't intentional,' he said. The theft in October last year has led to fears many messages around Mandelson's appointment may be lost. But Mr McSweeney suggested they were handed to No 10. In his earlier session with MPs, Sir Philip Barton revealed he was not asked whether Mandelson should be picked. He said: 'At no point did anyone consult me, ask me. I was presented with a decision and told to get on with it.' He also admitted he was 'worried'. Sir Philip agreed with other Foreign Office figures there was pressure to process Mandelson's clearance as quickly as possible. But the mandarin said there was no pressure 'on the substance' of the DV decision, although there were demands from No 10 to get the ambassador in place rapidly. The Cabinet Office initially claimed because Mandelson was a peer, he was classed as a 'fit and proper person' so did not require DV. But Sir Philip said he raised concerns and the Cabinet Office eventually backed down. In another blow to Sir Keir's claim due process was followed, Sir Philip said the 'normal order' in ambassadorial appointments is 'vetting then announcement'. Asked what happened in Mandelson's case, he said the timing was 'driven and decided by No 10'. Sir Philip also confirmed reports the then-foreign secretary David Lammy shared his concerns about the appointment. Mr Lammy told him 'he would talk to No 10' at the time. The comments below have not been moderated. The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline. By posting your comment you agree to our house rules. Do you want to automatically post your MailOnline comments to your Facebook Timeline? Your comment will be posted to MailOnline as usual. Do you want to automatically post your MailOnline comments to your Facebook Timeline? Your comment will be posted to MailOnline as usual We will automatically post your comment and a link to the news story to your Facebook timeline at the same time it is posted on MailOnline. To do this we will link your MailOnline account with your Facebook account. We’ll ask you to confirm this for your first post to Facebook. You can choose on each post whether you would like it to be posted to Facebook. Your details from Facebook will be used to provide you with tailored content, marketing and ads in line with our Privacy Policy.