Top News

Good Morning Britain dealt another crushing blow to Sir Keir Starmer on Monday morning, as presenter Richard Madeley asked if his "carnival" was going to continue. In his first public appearance since the sacking of Lord Mandelson, Sir Keir Starmer will be under pressure to regain control of the political narrative as the country prepares to welcome US President Donald Trump on his second state visit.

Madeley asked: "Will all this be enough to move the carnival on?" News correspondent Louisa James replied: "Well, there are certainly a lot of people who are doing their best to keep the Lord Mandelson scandal in the spotlight, saying that there are still questions that need to be answered." She then pointed out that it isn't only voices in opposition parties saying that it shouldn't be swept under the carpet, but from within the Labour Party as well - in what is a major blow to the British Prime Minister. Louisa added: "There is a lot of anger within the Labour Party about how this has been handled."

The reporter then shared how one Labour MP told the breakfast show that it is "like living in a horror show" and many MPs are "talking about the local elections in May as a deadline for the Prime Minister."

Louisa continued: "As you would expect, a lot of that anger is coming from Labour MPs who are already upset with the Labour leadership over other things, such as welfare and benefits."

The report comes as the Conservative Party has written to Sir Keir Starmer demanding answers over the extent of Downing Street's knowledge of Lord Mandelson's links to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

The Tories also called for the prime minister to release documents relating to Mandelson's appointment, including evidence showing how No 10 reacted when they learned of his ties to Epstein.

Labour had previously said that Mandelson was "worth the risk" when he was appointed as US ambassador. Business Secretary Peter Kyle told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips on Sky News: "The Cabinet Office did an independent inquiry into the appointment, as they do in every public appointment of this nature, and the information, that was presented to the Prime Minister.

"The second process was obviously a political process where there are political conversations done in No 10 about all the other aspects of an appointment of this nature.

"Now both of these things turned up information that was already public and a decision was made that based on Peter's singular talents in this area, that the risk of appointing knowing what was already public was worth the risk.

"Now of course we have seen the emails which were not published at the time, were not public and not even known about, and that has changed the situation."