TAUBE – Will the Epstein files bring down a British prime minister?

Keir Starmer swept to power on a historic mandate. Less than two years later, the Epstein files are testing his judgment and his grip on power

IT SEEMS LIKE only yesterday when Keir Starmer was on top of the political world in the United Kingdom. His Labour Party won 411 out of 650 seats in the July 2024 general election. While most political observers recognized that his victory was largely due to voter frustrations with the ruling Tory Party, it was still a 174-seat super-majority for the incoming Prime Minister.

Things have dramatically changed in less than two years. Starmer’s yesterday looks very bleak today. The forecast for tomorrow is even more uncertain.

And it’s all because of the Epstein files.

Starmer has faced a rocky political road almost since the very beginning. Labour’s political manifesto, Change, suggested it would be “pro-business and pro-worker” during the campaign. Unsurprisingly, the historically hard-left views of this party have played a much larger role than the more recent centre-left policies of former prime ministers Tony Blair and, to a lesser extent, Gordon Brown.

Several left-wing ideas were touted, including: developing a “publicly owned clean power company,” Great British Energy; initiating a “Green Prosperity Plan” and “Clean Power Alliance” for the environment; taxing private schools and siphoning this money into state education; strengthening workers’ rights; announcing new reforms to British railways by “bringing them into public ownership” going forward; lowering the voting age to 16 — and more.

British voters may have desired change, but not what was listed in Change.

Various political controversies also rocked the Labour government. Starmer had failed to declare a gift of several thousand pounds of clothes to his wife, Victoria, by party donor Waheed Alli, Baron Alli. Labour, through Starmer and his Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, “floated, then abandoned, an election manifesto-busting income tax rise to plug a £30 billion fiscal black hole,” as Time Magazine put it, during its autumn budget last year.

Reuters, through Sky News figures, revealed that the PM “declared more than 100,000 pounds ($132,500) in gifts, benefits and hospitality since December 2019, more than any other member of parliament.”

Tulip Siddiq, who served in his cabinet as Economic Secretary to the Treasury and City Minister, resigned in disgrace in July 2025 after allegations of misconduct and connections to deposed Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

This was followed by the resignation of his Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Homelessness and Democracy Rushanara Ali in August 2025 after allegations that she had evicted tenants from a property she owned and, after being unable to sell it, raised the rent prices.

The biggest controversy was about to come.

Peter Mandelson, a longtime Labour politician, cabinet minister and former member of the House of Lords, served as British Ambassador to the United States from February to September 2025. It was known that he had ties to Jeffrey Epstein, a U.S. financier and convicted child sex offender who was also accused of sex trafficking of minors before being found dead in his cell in 2019.

Their connection became subject to a bigger scandal when the Epstein files revealed personal correspondence that showed the friendship continued well after the 2008 conviction—and allegations of payments made to Mandelson and his husband. This has led to a police investigation that has embarrassed the Labour government on a daily basis.

Who appointed Mandelson to this role in the U.S.? Starmer.

The British PM doesn’t appear to have any political or personal ties to Epstein. Nevertheless, he said in early February that he was aware of the Epstein-Mandelson connection when he nominated the latter as an ambassador. Starmer claimed that Mandelson “lied repeatedly” about the extent of his past contact with Epstein, apologized to victims for “believing Mandelson’s lies” and suggested the former minister and political adviser had “betrayed our country.”

The reason why this controversy has exploded was because it showed that Starmer’s political judgment was even worse than originally assumed. Peter Dorey, a professor of politics at Cardiff University, told NBC News that this seems like “yet another example of Starmer’s lack of political judgment and poor decision-making … His most serious yet.”

Exactly so. If you know there are existing red flags associated with an individual, and you choose to ignore these warnings for whatever reason, it’s a huge red flag in itself. Starmer’s appointment of Mandelson as British ambassador to the U.S. is a perfect example of this.

Could the Epstein files bring down Starmer? Time will tell, but he’s definitely in big trouble. His chief of staff has already resigned along with his communications director. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has called on him to quit, too. Starmer’s cabinet has opted to back him for the time being. That may not last long if push comes to shove.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch came up with the perfect description for Starmer’s situation on Tuesday: “He is in office, but not in power.” If the hapless British PM is brought down in the coming days or weeks, then the Epstein files will have claimed their biggest political scalp.

Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.

© Troy Media