Mandelson is the author of his own misfortune

Given what has emerged about Peter Mandelson's relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, it was both inevitable and right that he should be sacked from one of the most prestigious, high-profile and sensitive roles in public life.

- 

No individual, whatever their talents, is bigger than the standing of the country they purport to represent on the national stage.

Two questions arise immediately from this affair. First, why Sir Keir Starmer appointed him in the first place; and why, in recent days, the prime minister continued to express such belief in his friend and ally.

As recently as the last session of Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir declared: “I have confidence in him, and he is playing an important role in the UK-US relationship.” In other words, what did No 10 know, and when? If Sir Keir's pledge of transparency in government is to mean anything, he must now publish the papers relating to Lord Mandelson's appointment, and open up the whole process to public scrutiny.

The prime minister's spokesperson has let it be known that the details about the relationship were not available last December when Lord Mandelson landed the job. That suggests the vetting process may not have been as vigorous as it should have been, and a serious lapse in intelligence-gathering for such a posting.

It also betrays a lack of curiosity on the part of the prime minister, and unexpectedly so in a man with such legal expertise, a reputation for forensic attention to detail and, as his chief of staff apparently thinks, with the outlook of an HR manager. After all, Lord Mandelson's association with Epstein was well known - and that alone should have disqualified him from consideration. Common sense should have come into play.