UK Politics

5319 readers

125 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

UK leader Starmer fights for his job as Mandelson-Epstein revelations spark a leadership crisis (apnews.com)

submitted 3 days ago by IndustryStandard@lemmy.world to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Starmer lost his chief of staff on Sunday and is rapidly shedding support from Labour legislators after revelations about the relationship between former British ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson and the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Starmer is due to address Labour lawmakers behind closed doors later Monday in an attempt to rebuild some of his shattered authority.

The political storm stems from Starmer’s decision in 2024 to appoint Mandelson to Britain’s most important diplomatic post, despite knowing he had ties to Epstein.

Starmer fired Mandelson in September after emails were published showing that he maintained a friendship with Epstein after the late financier’s 2008 conviction for sex offenses involving a minor. Critics say Starmer should have known better than to appoint Mandelson, 72, a contentious figure whose career has been studded with scandals over money or ethics.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dxgsthrr@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can think of at least one country leader who should step down due to their involvement in the Epstein files, and it isn't Starmer.

If Starmer stands down because of Mandelson's historical links to Epstein (the full extent of which is only now becoming apparent) it would be ridiculous. People with actual connections to Epstein are not standing down, so why should Starmer?

[–] zedcell@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Everyone in politics knows about Mandelson being a paedo-adjacent/paedo-apologist right wing freak at best, he never should have been put in the post and at the time he was left wing groups and media were actively calling out the decision. The depths dredged by the paedophile Centre and right of the labour party makes them clearly unfit to lead.

[–] dxgsthrr@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Utterly absurd position IMO, and I don't believe that it can honestly be held by any rational person. But you are welcome to it

[–] zedcell@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Touched a nerve did I?