meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Coffee House Shots

The Mandelson scandal could spell the end for Starmer

Coffee House Shots

The Spectator

News, Daily News, Politics

4.42.2K Ratings

🗓️ 4 February 2026

⏱️ 14 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Another impressive PMQs from Kemi Badenoch – but she had plenty of ammunition to deploy after the Peter Mandelson scandal took a bleaker turn this week.

The Prime Minister clearly wanted to make a strong statement in his first answer to Kemi Badenoch, saying that ‘Mandelson betrayed our country, our parliament and my party’. He added: ‘He lied repeatedly to my team when asked about his relationship with Epstein before and during his tenure as ambassador. I regret appointing him.’ He then listed the actions he had taken to strip Mandelson of his title, remove him from the Privy Council, and refer material to the Metropolitan Police.

The whole thing exposed Starmer’s biggest weaknesses: his over-reliance on process and his inability to consider how the public see him. There is a lot of support for a full public inquiry, which seems more fitting to the magnitude of this scandal. As the evidence piles in and the scandal rumbles on, is this the beginning of the end for the prime minister – or are we even further along than that?

James Heale speaks to Tim Shipman and Isabel Hardman.

Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Megan McElroy.



Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.


For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts.


Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk


Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

Hello, welcome to Coffee House Shots. I'm James Heel and I'm joined today by Tim Shipman

0:08.7

and Isabel Harbman. Now, Isabel, that was quite a PMQ session we've just witnessed, right?

0:13.1

It was. And it wasn't just quite a PMQ session because of the subject matter, Peter Mandelson,

0:18.1

or indeed because Kemi Baderot was getting another go at the Peter Mandelson, or indeed because Kemi Badernock was getting another go at the Peter

0:23.0

Mandelson affair, which she'd done really well on last September, but also because it just

0:28.2

highlighted so many of Kirstarmer's weaknesses, his tendency to hide behind process, the fact that

0:34.2

he can very easily get sidetracked into defending the honour of the cabinet secretary

0:37.9

rather than talking about victims. And also, I suppose, as somebody who's writing a book on public

0:43.9

inquiries, I was just delighted that we had another call for a public inquiry from Sir Ed Davy.

0:48.4

So for me, it ticked a lot of boxes. I think of the six questions, I mean, it was the third answer

0:52.4

when it was, Kevin Baynot was asking him, were you aware of the fact that that relationship between Peter Madel's and Jeffrey Epstein had continued after the conviction? And he finally admitted, yes, we knew and yes, the security service knew. That seemed to be the key mission. That was the key mission. And he knew he was going to have to make it after the Bader knock had opened her mouth for the first time. but Starma was able with the first question to say, here's some stuff you didn't know.

1:13.7

We've stripped him of the Privy Council. I've been on to the palace, la-di-da-di-da. Here's some news. Obfuscate, obfuscate news. And then in the second one, he sort of, there was more process and regret. And just the giant indignation.

1:28.6

I mean, you talk about Lord Mandelson, Peter Man, Mandelson, as the Prime Minister referred

1:34.4

to him throughout. This man who has lied to me. And what was glorious about this, him defending

1:40.2

the honour of the cabinet secretary. So just to explain, Kimmy Bade-Knox basically said, we need independent oversight of the documents that you're releasing, because you're saying you won't release some of them for national security reasons. Well, frankly, we don't believe you. We think there's going to be a cover-up. And Stama says in response to that, oh, but the cabinet secretary will be overseeing it, will not be a political decision. Well, everybody knows the

2:00.9

Cabinet Secretary is appointed by the Prime Minister. In fact, this Cabinet Secretary, there isn't a single

2:05.5

other person in government who would have appointed him apart from this Prime Minister. He owes his

2:09.3

job entirely to Kirstama. Cabinet Secretary is a part of the team. We'll do what they need to do

2:14.4

to please the Prime Minister and to avoid embarrassing the sort of order and dignity of the Cabinet office and all of that.

2:21.5

So Bade knock quite rightly said, bring in the Intelligence and Security Committee.

2:25.8

They can make these decisions. They're properly independent, not like the Cabinet Secretary.

2:29.5

And dear old Starmer went, well, I'm really quite upset that she's impugning the integrity of the

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Spectator, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of The Spectator and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.