Sir Keir Starmer has been branded a man unfit to run the country, who has lost the moral right to govern after the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal. 

In an excoriating verdict on the Prime Minister, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch also condemns him as a PM consumed by his own survival who was putting national security at risk. 

And with Sir Keir fighting for his political life, she renews her call for him to do the decent thing and resign – and to stop blaming officials for why he didn't know that Mandelson was appointed US ambassador despite having failed a crucial security vetting.

Writing for The Mail on Sunday, she says: 'The hypocrisy is staggering... He is taking the public for fools.' 

She also says: 'Keir Starmer claims to be furious with officials. It is us who should be furious with him ... While he protects himself, decisions are delayed and problems fester.'

Mrs Badenoch's intervention comes ahead of a crucial week which could decide the Prime Minister's future, starting with his statement to MPs in the Commons tomorrow in which he will reiterate claims he did not know about Mandelson's vetting status.

In a desperate response to the revelations, Sir Keir will also be expected to justify sacking Sir Olly Robbins – the most senior Foreign Office civil servant – over his department's decision to overrule the security verdict.

But just 24 hours after tomorrow's Commons showdown, Sir Olly is expected to publicly defend himself for the first time at an explosive meeting of the foreign affairs committee.

Mrs Badenoch's brutal takedown of the Prime Minister came as:

• It emerged that security chiefs handed a dossier to Sir Keir's team about Mandelson's dubious links to Russia and his relationship to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein in 2023, further undermining the Prime Minister's claims he had no knowledge of the unsuitability of his appointment.
• The Tories plot a major Commons D-Day showdown over the scandal, using the same tactics first weaponised against Boris Johnson by Sir Keir himself.
• Armed Forces minister Al Carns was said to be on 'resignation watch', with some Labour MPs insisting that Sir Keir must either quit or face a leadership challenge in the wake of his 'serial failure of judgment' over Mandelson. 
• Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey called on Sir Keir to publish a separate Cabinet Office due diligence report on the New Labour grandee, completed before he was appointed, adding that 'chucking civil servants under the bus isn't good enough'. 
• Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar stood by his call for the PM to quit, saying the latest twist in the Mandelson affair 'demonstrates why I said what I said in February'. 

Former Labour minister Graham Stringer told the MoS last night: 'When the challenge to Sir Keir comes, I cannot say – but a challenge is inevitable.

'This whole affair has just shone a spotlight on the shambles at the centre of the Government where a hands-off Prime Minister has abdicated responsibility for leadership.'

Downing Street continues to insist that the decision to overrule Mandelson's vetting rejection was taken by Sir Olly alone, with no other individuals tainted by last week's shocking revelation. But Sir Olly's predecessor as the Foreign Office's top mandarin, Lord (Simon) McDonald, said he did not buy the Government's claims.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, he accused the Prime Minister of sacking Sir Olly because he wanted 'a scalp as quickly as possible'.

The MoS can reveal that as far back as 2023 senior Labour shadow ministers were handed a detailed briefing on Mandelson by British security services, amid fears he was gaining growing control over Sir Keir's operation.

According to both Labour and security sources, the party leader's team received the detailed dossiers which highlighted Mandelson's links with Epstein, his targeting by Russian intelligence and his relationship with Putin allies.

They dealt specifically with the singling out of UK politicians by Russian state actors, with particular attention on Mandelson's relationship with Epstein dating back to 2006, which were reportedly closely monitored by Russian security services.

A British security source said: 'The briefings to Starmer's team were first provided in 2023, and continued into 2024. They included information on his relationship with Epstein and targeting by Russian intelligence.

'They pre-dated the Prime Minister's decision to appoint Mandelson. There is no way Starmer was not aware of the risks associated with the appointment.' 

Security sources also expressed incredulity at the way the blocking of Mandelson's Developed Vetting clearance was overturned by Foreign Office officials. 

They claimed that for Mandelson to be approved for the role of ambassador he would have to have passed three separate levels of security checks, of which DV (developed vetting) was the lowest level.

Reports last night suggested that mitigation measures were put in place following Mandelson's vetting procedure, in order to deal with the security concerns.

These included banning him from having unsupervised access to former clients from his lobbying career. 

And the Lib Dems called on Sir Keir to publish the due diligence advice provided to him on Mandelson's appointment by the Cabinet Office, which raised concerns about his past controversies. 

While it would be released alongside the so-called 'Mandelson files', Sir Ed Davey argued that publication must be expedited ahead of tomorrow's Commons showdown.

It can also be revealed that the Government has rejected Tory calls to change the law in order to seize back Mandelson's £500,000 taxpayer-funded pension.

No 10 was approached over claims that Sir Keir was warned while in opposition about Mandelson's connections.

On Saturday night, in response to the Tory leader's claims about Sir Keir, a Labour source said: 'No one in this country is more lazy or unfit for office than Kemi Badenoch.' 

He's lost the moral right to govern. Now our feeble Prime Minister cares only about saving his own skin, writes Tory leader KEMI BADENOCH 

Why does Sir Keir Starmer want to be Prime Minister? It's very hard to know. But what's certain is that Britain is paying the price of having a PM with no interest in doing the job.

Perhaps you think 'all politicians are liars'. Yet the disgraceful appointment of Peter Mandelson points not just to dishonesty, but to a premier too idle to ask basic questions and too weak to face the answers.

I have spent hours across the despatch box watching how Starmer operates. He doesn't just refuse to answer questions, he cannot answer questions. He doesn't know how to respond because he's not prepared to do the work.

Despite seven months of scandal at the very heart of government, Starmer claims to have made no enquiries, to have seen no documents, or to have heard anything that would have told him Peter Mandelson failed the security vetting.

Even by his own defence (fanciful as it is), Starmer has shown himself lacking in any grip, to be lazy in his thinking and, as it turns out, too idle to ask the most basic questions of his staff.

The hypocrisy is everywhere. A year ago, Starmer said 'defence would be the first thought in the morning, the last at night'. Yet the authors of his own Strategic Defence Review are lining up to criticise his dangerous inaction on defence spending.

The debacle over the Iran war has exposed a Government that continues to prioritise welfare payments over defending our country, even as three former Labour defence secretaries beg Starmer to increase spending on our national security and cut the ballooning benefits budget.

And at the heart of it is the Prime Minister's vision-free leadership. In this Labour Government, ministers pull in different directions. Policies are announced without clarity and abandoned when reality intrudes. The result is an administration grinding to a halt.

Curiosity is what drives serious leadership. It is what makes a prime minister read the extra briefing and challenge the easy assumption. Without curiosity, problems are neither fully understood nor solved.

Without it, there are no real ideas. In its place, political emptiness: A polished exterior, but with no substance behind it. There's an impression of seriousness, but when you look for the underlying vision, it's just not there.

Compared with recent shambolic Labour leaders such as Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, it's fair to say that Starmer looks the part, at least. The expensive glasses, the suit and tie give the right impression. But compare Starmer to real leaders, the sort who show conviction and strategic clarity, and the gap is obvious.

In fact, the real scandal is not the appointment of Mandelson – serious though that is – but the woeful direction of our country under Starmer's incurious regime.

Keir Starmer claims to be furious with officials. It is us who should be furious with him because hard-working Mail on Sunday readers are paying the price for his mistakes.

A real leader stands up for the country, puts the national interest first and takes the hits. Yet this scandal exposes a man who thinks only about himself. Starmer has sacrificed his staff, blamed the security services and sent ministers out to lie on his behalf.

He is disloyal not just to his country, but to those serving beneath him. People can accept a leader who makes an unpopular call and stands by it; they loathe a leader who lets others take the fall while he clings on. Time and again, when things go wrong, it is always someone else's fault. Starmer's stock defence is 'don't blame me, I'm only the Prime Minister'.

The hypocrisy is staggering. The Labour leader built his reputation on standards, rules, and truthfulness in public life. Yet the voters know that those rules – sacred for the rest of us – are optional when it comes to the powerful. This is dishonesty mingled with weakness, evasion and contempt.

Authority does not just come from the title of Prime Minister. It is earned through the truthfulness and responsibility that Starmer lacks.

He is either lying about what he knew about Mandelson's appointment, in which case he is corrupting the office, or he is so lazy and incompetent that he is unfit to run the country.

We are entering a harsher world which is less stable abroad, less cohesive at home and less certain of itself overall.

Questions about growth, security, immigration, integration, family, identity and national purpose are not abstract debates. They will shape the country our children inherit, the opportunities they have, the values they grow up with, and whether they feel they belong to a nation that knows who it is and where it is going.

Economic stagnation, failing public services, the rising cost of living, declining living standards, uncontrolled migration and a of lack integration, threats from Russia, China and Iran... These are not abstract problems, they shape both our daily lives and the future our children will inherit.

Yet we have a Prime Minister consumed by his own survival. And, while he hangs on, desperately, the country drifts. While he protects himself, decisions are delayed and problems fester.

Starmer has no idea how to make this country better, which is why we are becoming a nation that simply manages decline instead of striving for greatness. It is not a future I will accept – and it is not the future this country deserves.

This is not a moment for bland managerialism, or for leaders clinging to office while the country loses confidence.

It is a moment for seriousness, for courage, and for a government with a clear sense of duty to the next generation.

Starmer has misled Parliament over Mandelson, misled the country and is taking the public for fools. This is not just a political failure. It is a moral one: He has put our national security at risk, he has lost the right to govern, he should resign.

Britain can meet the many challenges it faces, but only if we are honest about them. And only if – like the Conservative Party under my leadership – we have a clear vision for the country and a clear plan to deliver it.