The curse of WhatsApp strikes again. The text messaging service habitually used by many UK politicians to chat to their colleagues was always a liability. They often seemed to believe they were talking in a secure space, but of course on social media nothing is really secure.
Now a tranche of some 1,500 text messages and emails has been published by the UK government relating to Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s appointment of Lord Mandelson as U.S. ambassador in 2024—and his sacking of him only months later following revelations about the former Labour spin doctor’s continuing friendship with Jeffrey Epstein even after the financier had been convicted of soliciting underage girls for prostitution.
This single diplomatic appointment has caused more embarrassment and stress for Starmer than all the others combined. How he must wish he had not listened to his advisor Morgan McSweeney and brought the “Prince of Darkness,” as Mandelson has often been called, back into public life. Starmer has since sacked McSweeney and the top civil servant at the Foreign Office, Sir Oliver Robbins, but the scandal will not die.
Today’s document dump is the result of a Commons vote four months ago, quaintly called “The Humble Address,” which compels the government to release internal documents that are normally kept confidential. Many Labour MPs joined with the opposition in demanding all communications between ministers about the Mandelson appointment.
Their release could not have come at a worse moment. Labour is in the middle of a phony war over the party leadership, with rivals lining up to challenge Starmer. The only silver lining for the PM is that his own communications with Mandelson have mostly been redacted, presumably on grounds of national security. Also, Mandelson himself has refused to hand over his own WhatsApp messages, which he says are private.
But the published messages are bad enough. They reveal the extent to which even Starmer’s closest aides thought him to be underpowered and inconstant.
“Lacking in verve,” says Mandelson in one post, “beleaguered and bereft.” Not much loyalty there to the man who appointed him to the very highest British diplomatic post. Others talk of how Starmer lacks leadership skills, does not seem to know what he stands for, and constantly backs down in the manner of “advance, buckle; advance, buckle”.
Well, tell us something we don’t know was the reaction of many Westminster insiders to these critical observations. It is hardly news that many in Labour have a poor view of the prime minister’s leadership abilities.
But the most damaging communication came not from Mandelson but in a text message from Pat McFadden, now secretary of state for work and pensions. Last year, when he was still chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and one of the cabinet ministers closest to Starmer, McFadden lamented that, in every meeting he has with Labour MPs, they ask: “Whom can we tax in order to pay benefits to others?”
That will surely be the top line in Reform UK’s campaign in the crucial Makerfield by-election in two weeks time. Its leader, Nigel Farage, says the texts confirm his claim that Labour is the “welfare party.” The Tory leader, Kemi Badenoch, says it shows Labour thinks “our taxes are their money to spend.”
In two weeks’ time, the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham will contest a by-election here that he hopes will propel him into Parliament, where he can mount a formal challenge to Starmer as Labour leader and prime minister. He has construed the latest Mandelson messages as confirmation that Labour needs a “new direction.” Yet they may do his campaign more harm than good.
Makerfield is a predominantly working-class constituency in Greater Manchester, but it is not among the most deprived. It has relatively high home ownership and an aspirational, skilled population. It also has a lower percentage of ethnic minorities than the rest of England.
This means that it is fertile ground for Reform UK, and not just because many constituents are worried about immigration. Reform’s message—too many, especially too many young people, are relying on welfare instead of getting out of their bedrooms and looking for work—will chime with many voters here.
This was indeed the message of the former Labour minister Alan Milburn’s report last week on so called NEETs—an acronym that means young people not in employment, education or training. One in eight young people under 24 in Britain is a NEET. Milburn has argued that the welfare system “gives them an income but not a way out” of the benefits trap.
Had he been in the Commons last year, Burnham would most probably have been one of those Labour MPs arguing for higher tax and against cuts in disability benefits to which McFadden alludes. He has always been happy to call himself “a socialist,” even though he claims now to accept the need for fiscal discipline. The latest opinion polls have Labour neck and neck in Makerfield, and while the Mandelson Files may not be a deciding issue, they certainly contribute to the sense that Labour is out of touch with ordinary voters.
But whether he has anything new to offer is questionable. He has become known as “Andy U-turnham” after he reversed several of his positions, including on debt, “gender reform,” and immigration control. It is not entirely clear where he stands on the economy, though he remains significantly to the left of Starmer on taxation and spending.
It seems that the Mandelson affair is the scandal that just keeps on giving. So how could one man cause so much damage? And why do successive Labour prime ministers think they cannot do without him?
Mandelson was a key architect of New Labour back in the day. Renowned for his skill as a political message-maker, he helped deliver Tony Blair’s 1997 election landslide. Blair made him a cabinet minister for his efforts.
He was forced to resign after revelations that he had received an undisclosed loan from one businessman and had helped another with a passport application.
But the next Labour prime minister, Gordon Brown, brought Mandelson back into government in 2008 as business secretary. After Labour lost the 2010 general election, Mandelson went private again. He founded his own lobbying company, Global Counsel, which secured contracts with Russian and Chinese state-backed companies.
It later emerged in the Epstein files released by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2025 that during his time in government, Mandelson had been providing Epstein with market-sensitive information about UK financial and industrial policy. Mandelson is now under criminal investigation for misconduct in public life.
Subscribe Today
Get daily emails in your inbox
He resigned from the Labour Party and the House of Lords in February 2026. But it subsequently emerged that “Mandy,” as everyone calls him, had not been properly vetted before his appointment as U.S. ambassador. He was allowed access to highly sensitive intelligence that could have related to the U.S. president.
Mandelson has long been Labour’s fatal weakness. But the impact of the latest tranche of text messages has been somewhat muted, not because of their content, but because everyone, even on the Labour benches, already seems to regard Starmer as a loser.
If Burnham finally makes it to Westminster, we can be fairly sure of two things, however. He will not be calling for the services of the Prince of Darkness. And he will auto-delete his WhatsApps.
