Why McSweeney’s departure could prove perilous for the PM
11 minutes agoJoe PikePolitics correspondent
PA MediaMorgan McSweeney has never spoken publicly about the immensely consequential role he has played in British politics over the last decade.
It is almost impossible to find a clip of his voice. He completely avoids the TV cameras and photographers who lurk around Whitehall at times of political crisis.
Yet the elusive Irishman’s sudden departure as Sir Keir Starmer’s top aide – a result of his fateful advice in autumn 2024 that Lord Mandelson should be the UK’s ambassador to Washington – leaves the prime minister exposed in a way that might not be immediately clear.
One question many in Westminster are now pondering is: what sort of politician will Sir Keir be without the man many say was his political brain?
Because unlike almost all relationships between prime minister and adviser, Sir Keir did not choose McSweeney – it was arguably the other way around.
In the Corbyn years when control of Labour had been lost to the left, McSweeney polled party members and decided that the lawyer and shadow Brexit secretary was his best chance for wrestling back control of his party.
In what some claim was an elaborate and perfectly-executed deception, McSweeney managed to persuade pro-Corbyn party members that Sir Keir was one of them.
And after winning the leadership, Sir Keir purged many Corbynites – including the former leader himself – and pivoted to a more centrist general election pitch.
McSweeney’s work at Labour HQ during the 2001 election and later in local government shaped his campaigning instincts.
In an echo of Boris Johnson’s adviser Dominic Cummings, McSweeney is credited with masterminding a general election landslide yet blamed for turbulence and U-turns once in government.
He is also accused of presiding over a “boys’ club” atmosphere at No 10, with some MPs now suggesting a full cultural reset is needed rather than just one change of personnel.
Starmer’s decision to appoint McSweeney’s deputies – Jill Cuthbertson and Vidhya Alakeson – to be his joint successors on an acting basis may start this process.
Some allies of the deposed chief of staff are angry, pointing out that there are other prominent advisers who also recommended Lord Mandelson yet remain in their jobs.
“He has taken full responsibility for the advice but he was not in charge of the vetting and he was not the only adviser,” said one McSweeney loyalist.
“Morgan was duped like many of us. He’s saved the party. A lot of MPs and the cabinet know they owe their jobs to him.
“But the noise is too much of a distraction and ultimately he’s a Labour man.”
Blaming the vetting process when Lord Mandelson’s post-conviction relationship with Epstein was eminently searchable stretches credibility, however.
For all those in government who regularly praised McSweeney’s political judgement, he clearly got it wrong on Lord Mandelson and is now the most high-profile casualty of this ongoing crisis.
It is unclear whether McSweeney was also worried that the upcoming disclosures of government documents related to Lord Mandelson might be personally embarrassing or awkward for him.
Getty ImagesLabour MPs will ultimately decide how long the PM remains in place, and it is as yet unclear whether this political scalp will satisfy some of the hunger for retribution.
No 10’s attempts to mollify backbenchers will continue in the coming days, with the 37 Scottish Labour MPs getting particular close attention. This is because many of them privately believe Starmer is a major drag on their chances for the Holyrood elections in May.
That government charm offensive starts with a reception at No 11 on Monday followed by a strategy meeting at No 10 on Tuesday.
Will voters care about the resignation of someone they might never have heard of?
“I doubt most people in the real world will notice,” says one Labour MP. “Talk of Mandelson very rarely came up on the doors in Gorton and Denton yesterday.”
But McSweeney’s departure removes the prime minister’s best campaign strategist and most trusted political adviser at a time Sir Keir is isolated and in potential peril.
Logic suggests that if the man who gave the advice should resign, why not the one who actually made the decision?
Sir Keir turned round his party’s fortunes in a single parliamentary term partly because he delegated much to McSweeney, but also because of his own ruthlessness, pragmatism and resilience.
Those skills will be tested like never before in the coming days.