Angela Rayner and Lord Mandelson are just the latest examples of Starmer’s erring judgement when it comes to character, writes Eliot Wilson
Last week was not a good one for Sir Keir Starmer. On Tuesday, he held the first meeting of his new-look cabinet, a reshuffle forced on him by the resignation of the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner. Her departure had been prompted by a number of unanswered questions – let’s be charitable – about her purchase of a property in Hove, her liability for stamp duty and her entry, or entries, on the electoral register.
The cabinet reshuffle had been especially galling for Starmer as it had come at the end of the week which had begun with his unveiling of new advisers in Downing Street. Bringing in former chief secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones as his agent of delivery had been billed as marking “phase two” of his premiership. Desperate to underline the fact that this was a reset of his government, he vowed he would: “demonstrate it could deliver higher living standards, so that people actually feel better off; improvements to public services, particularly the NHS; and security, both in terms of where people live and securing our borders.”
Changing behind-the-scenes advisers will always pale in comparison to a shuffle of the ministerial pack, however, and the carefully calibrated reorganisation soon became lost against the background noise of gossip.
Still, perhaps the first meeting of the new cabinet would allow the Prime Minister a platform to relaunch the administration. There was one nagging distraction: Rayner had resigned as deputy prime minister and housing, communities and local government secretary, but she had also given up her post as deputy leader of the Labour Party. That role is elected by the party membership, so an election would have to be called, and candidates were quick out of the traps in pursuit of ambition and positioning within Labour.
It was inevitable that the opportunity for a party-wide election would expose differences of opinion. Would the successful candidate be a Starmer loyalist, or a friendly (or not-so-friendly) critic from the Labour left?
Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Paula Barker, not two of the party’s most recognisable names, emerged to audition for the latter role, education secretary Bridget Phillipson and housing minister Alison McGovern sized up the “trusty” while it was more difficult to prioritise the motivations of Lucy Powell, sacked the previous week as leader of the House of Commons, and Dame Emily Thornberry, passed over for attorney general in favour of Starmer crony Lord Hermer when the government was formed last July.
When nominations closed, the field had narrowed, and Phillipson will go head-to-head with Powell. But for a few days it was open season on Labour’s dirty washing.
Starmer only has himself to blame
The week drew to a dismal close with Starmer forced to dismiss Britain’s ambassador to the United States, Lord Mandelson. It emerged with sickening slowness that the New Labour veteran’s relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein had continued after Epstein had served a pitifully short 13 months in prison. Worse, Mandelson had argued that his “pal” had been wrongfully convicted. One email read: “I think the world of you and I feel hopeless and furious about what has happened. I can still barely understand it. It just could not happen in Britain.”
There is a thread which links all of these setbacks and disasters: they all turned on appointments Sir Keir Starmer had made. He reshuffled a Downing Street operation and cabinet of his own choosing, he had appointed Angela Rayner as deputy prime minister – while that was fully expected, it was not required by constitutional convention or Labour Party rules – and he had specifically chosen Peter Mandelson as ambassador to Washington. Indeed, he had cancelled the informal appointment of veteran diplomat Sir Tim (now Lord) Barrow to put his own man in.
How did the Prime Minister put himself in this position? His judgement when it comes to public appointments now looks disastrous: Sue Gray, Louise Haigh, Tulip Siddiq and Peter Mandelson have all caused him headaches. His cabinet reshuffle only saw three ministers depart, one of whom, Ian Murray, returned the following day as a junior minister. But half of the portfolios changed hands, suggesting ministers like Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall were underperforming.
There is also a mulishness about Starmer. On Wednesday, he declared of Mandelson: “The ambassador has repeatedly expressed his deep regret for association with him, he’s right to do so. I have confidence in him and he’s playing an important role in the UK-US relationship.”
He was gone within 24 hours.
The previous week, at Prime Minister’s Questions, Starmer had affirmed: “I am very proud to sit alongside a deputy prime minister who is building 1.5m homes, who is bringing forward the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation, and who has come from a working-class background to be deputy prime minister.”
Rayner resigned two days later.
The wrong defence of the wrong people in the wrong jobs. Starmer’s “hebdomas horribilis”, to adapt the late queen’s phrase, simply highlights his lack of judgement.
Eliot Wilson is a writer, commentator and contributing editor at Defence On The Brink