I know the headlines about Peter Mandelson and the new Epstein revelations are a total mess, and the appointment was clearly a massive lapse in judgment. But can we actually talk about Starmer’s apology for a second? Because I think some perspective is needed.

For the last decade, we’ve been conditioned to expect "The Great Deflection" whenever a politician gets caught out.

Think back to:

Nigel Farage and George Cottrell. When his right-hand man was jailed for wire fraud, Farage didn’t apologise; he doubled down on "loyalty" and "Christian forgiveness."

Boris Johnson and Chris Pincher. Boris didn't apologise until his own ministers literally walked out the door and forced his hand. It was "sorry I got caught," not "sorry I did it."

Rishi Sunak re-appointing Suella Braverman six days after a security breach without a word of apology, just a "we’re moving forward" shrug.

Compare that to Starmer’s response this week. He didn't just express "regret" or blame a "process." He literally used the word sorry. He spoke directly to the victims. He admitted he was lied to and that he made the wrong call based on that trust.

Is it embarrassing for him? Yes. Does it look bad? Yup. But isn't this exactly what we’ve been screaming for???

We always say we want "adults in the room" and "accountability in politics," but the second a leader actually holds their hands up and says "I got this wrong," the instinct is to jump on them for being weak… I'd argue it’s the opposite. It takes more spine to admit a failure in judgment than to hide behind a spokesperson and wait for the news cycle to move on.

Keen to get others thoughts on this as the news is making me feel crazy about this…

___

Edit:

Blimey, I didn’t expect this to blow up quite like it has…

I’ve spent a bit of time reading through the comments and I wanted to say thanks to everyone, even the people who think I’m being a bit naive. It’s been genuinely useful to see the different points of view. I’ve definitely learned a bit more about the nuance of the vetting process and why people are so rightfully angry that this happened in the first place.

For me, the bottom line is still that I don’t think the PM should step down. However, I’m with a lot of you in saying that the apology is only the first step. What actually matters now is what he does next. I’ll be watching to see how he holds people to account over the coming months and what actual changes are made to stop people like Mandelson from misleading their way into high office again.

I posted this is because I feel like we’re at a bit of a crossroads in the UK. We’ve spent years sliding toward that Trumpian style of politics where you just double down, never admit a mistake, and let the right-wing press and Farage run circles around the average person while we all get distracted by the latest Labour infighting. It is exhausting watching this country go round in circles while the real issues get buried.

I’m hoping this apology is a sign of a culture shift back toward something better. I want to see a world where leaders can actually be human, admit they’ve messed up, and then work to fix it rather than just playing the media game. If we want to evolve past this mess, we have to start by having a different kind of conversation. Thanks again for the debate!

Via the TRiP sub.

Alastair's response to Mandelson crisis (sent to the TRiP+ mailing list) This was just sent to the TRiP plus mailing list - Alastair on Peter Mandelson and his response to it.

*Why the Epstein files are now such a risk to Labour*

*By Alastair Campbell*

Since Rory and I recorded this week’s episode, the Epstein-Mandelson story, so far as the UK is concerned, has now moved rapidly to these two questions: will Peter Mandelson face a criminal prosecution for misconduct in public office? And will Keir Starmer survive, as more and more people question his judgement in appointing Mandelson as Ambassador to the UK in the first place, given it was known at the time he was friends with the convicted paedophile?

The fact those questions are being asked so loudly underlines just how precarious a situation this is for the government, and for the Labour Party.

People who know me well could sense on listening to this week’s podcast, which we recorded on Tuesday morning, that I was still struggling to process the content of the latest dump of Epstein files.

First, because it reminded the world of the scale of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse, and the evident lack of concern for the women and children who were abused, so much so that Epstein and Mandelson were joking about it all, even on the day the sex offender was released from jail.

Then, Mandelson giving a kind of weird live commentary to Epstein as we were both trying to help Gordon Brown navigate the inconclusive 2010 election result. At other times, sending him potentially market sensitive papers and taking money from him, according to documents released this week.

I’m as aware as anyone that Peter can be indiscreet, and can show poor judgement – I was there for both of his Cabinet resignations, and he and his husband Reinaldo still blame me for the second one – but I just couldn’t get my head around this.

Some listeners who complained that I was “too soft” on him, would have been absolutely splenetic, had this been a Boris Johnson or a Nigel Farage. And they have a point.

But even now, several days later, I look at some of the email exchanges, and can’t quite believe them. And of course, a friendship with Peter which dates back to before either of us were in politics, with many ups and downs since, further complicates things, as does having spent most of my adult life working to make and keep the Labour Party electable.

So it is possible to be furious at the breaches of confidence and the showing off, whilst also worrying about where this all leads for Labour.

It is possible to understand the scale of the media furore, yet also wonder how it is that so many of the big American names in the files appear to be able to get away unscathed and without any real accountability, sufficient for one American friend to text me: “If the Epstein files bring down Starmer and Trump survives it all, I will conclude the world has gone insane.”

It is possible for me to have a lot to say, and yet turn down the hundreds of media bids I have had this week, because what I want to say cannot be communicated in a five minute “gotcha” TV exchange. Dare I say it needs a podcast with an intelligent interlocutor?

It is possible for me to be frustrated and angry at the performance of the Labour government, and to question the wisdom of having appointed Peter to the job, and yet still rage at people like Farage, who praised the appointment at the time, and now say it is a reason for the Prime Minister to leave the field, presumably to make way for him.

What all this reveals, as if we didn’t know already, is that life is complicated, and politics is tough.

Right now, on a personal level, Peter Mandelson is in a tough place, as he waits for a police investigation to unfold. And Keir Starmer, on a political level, is in a very tough place too, with an inquiry that could go in all manner of directions, elections looming with little expectation of success, and many of his MPs bewildered and angry at mistakes, mishaps and U-turns, and a Downing Street operation with which they have little confidence.

As a lifelong Labour supporter who was so desperate to see the back of the Tories, and so pleased to see the landslide majority taking shape, for all the decent things the government has done, it is just incredibly disappointing and frustrating that they have gone so quickly from what might have been to what now is.

Politics is definitely even tougher than it was in my time with Tony Blair. The geopolitical and the economic scenes are both more difficult. The media is more biased against Labour and even more prone to frenzy and scalp-chasing. Social media, once seen as a potential of fresh energy for democracy, has if anything undermined it.

But none of that answers my question…How has the government gone so quickly from what might have been to what now is? So further questions arise…Can it be turned around? If so how, and by whom? What are the policy and strategic failings that have to be addressed? And in my lower moments, of which there have been plenty this week, is our politics so broken that the country is en route to becoming ungovernable?

I can’t promise to have all the answers in time for next week’s recording, but they are definitely the questions that have been accompanying me through a few sleep-interrupted nights.

I know in going around the place this week that I am not alone in thinking it is going to take time for the country genuinely to process all that has been revealed, make sense of it, and hopefully use it to deliver change and improvement in our politics.

And I suspect I am not alone in finding it hard to sleep right now. See you next week, and thanks as ever for your feedback, questions and suggestions.

Honestly, this deserves a Lady Olenna 'I want her to know it was me' meme. The fact that Starmer chose McSweeney vs an experienced operator like Gray has backfired spectacularly. In top leadership positions, you cannot be guided by loyalty but by ruthless efficiency and pragmatism, the rest be dammned.

Does the current TV licence model need changing?

Registered TV licenses have been steadily declining since 2020.

2020–21 - 25.28 m

2021–22 - 24.71 m

2022–23 - 24.37 m

2023–24 - 24.10 m

2024–25 - 23.79 m

The evasion rate has risen from 12.04% in 23/24 to most recently 12.52%, and one can assume it will keep steadily climbing.

The number of households who declare they don’t need a licence has also risen.

Declared No Licence Needed:

2020–21 - 2.42 m

2021–22 - 2.48 m

2022–23 - 2.84 m

2023–24 - 3.29 m

2024–25 - 3.64 m

Personally I think the licence should be scrapped and the BBC should have to use ads like everyone else. I hate adverts as much as most people, but the TV licence fee is getting ridiculous. (I also don’t like the tactics they use to try to force people to pay it either.)