By Faye Brown, political reporter 

Sir Keir Starmer is hoping to avoid a difficult vote with his own MPs today by disclosing documents relating to Peter Mandelson's US Ambassador appointment - apart from those that could impact national security or damage national relations. 

The Tories had been planning to force the publication of all records using an ancient parliament mechanism - which several Labour MPs had said they would support before the government's intervention late last night.

Now, MPs tell Paste BN they are "split" on whether to back Number 10's rival amendment or the Conservatives' one.

There is concern that the national security exemption could be used broadly to keep important documents out of the public domain - and risk widening the row.

"We need everything out in the public now to move on from it - many are split on it," says one MP. 

Another said the government's amendment "won't wash" as "you could say anything embarrassing to the government could impact international relations or national security".

MPs weighing up their options want assurances on what the government might hold back and who is making that decision.

Many are furious with both Starmer and his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, for deciding to appoint Mandelson to the top diplomatic job, saying his close association with Epstein was known about at the time. (Ministers said when they sacked him, they weren't aware of its depth or extent).

One MP said the PM needs to "answer" why Mandelson was appointed "when he had knowingly associated with a convicted child sex offender",  while another said there has been "quiet anger at McSweeney for a long time", claiming his "fingerprints are on quite a lot of what's wrong about this government".

"We are all done with this hold your nose crap", a third said.

But while there is anger it would be a big deal for Labour MPs to support the Tories over the government.

One left wing MP - while lambasting Starmer and McSweeney - said: "I don’t ever support the Tories on any issue."

Another said the government amendment seemed "reasonable" but stressed: "We want to not only understand the dark shadow [Mandelson] cast over our Party for many decades but how far his influence reached, right up to this very day."

Some MPs may express their opposition by abstaining.

Ultimately,  the toss-up is whether to stay loyal and save Starmer's skin at a time when he is already on thin ice, or risk accusations of a cover up if the government tries to hold back too many documents in the name of national security. 

Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner has suggested parliament's Information and Security Committee (ISC) should decide which Mandelson papers to redact.

MPs have started to debate the humble address on the Mandelson papers.

Rayner said to MPs: "In 2022, I proposed a humble address seeking information about PPE, which the party opposite was listed, and [as Labour MP Meg Hillier] mentioned just before, should... the ISC not have the same role now in keeping public confidence in the process?"

Our political editor Beth Rigby says it's a very significant intervention, suggesting that the government's amendment to prevent information that prejudices national security or international relations is insufficient.

It's a massive blow for the government and reveals the depth of unhappiness among Labour MPs, Beth says.

Sir Keir Starmer was full of regret and remorse over the appointment of Mandelson, but the look on this former prosecutor's face suggests he was not convinced by his own argument.

The prime minister looked uncomfortable as he was asked to explain why he appointed Mandelson when the question was raised in vetting his ongoing friendship with Epstein, even after the disgraced financier's conviction in 2008 for soliciting a minor.

Tory leader Kemi Badenoch asked: "Can the prime minister tell us, did the official security vetting he received mention Mandelson's ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?"

"Yes it did," Starmer replies.

To that, he said he did not know the "sheer depth" of the relationship but was as "angry as anyone" to learn that Mandelson's friendship extended to allegedly passing on government secrets.

To that, MPs will ask - how much evidence did he need?

Sir Keir almost portrayed the entire Labour family as victims of Mandelson, saying the former Cabinet minister had "lied repeatedly" to his team and had "betrayed our country, our parliament and my party".

And while it is true that the prime minister can't have known everything Mandelson was doing on his emails, the charge is that he knew enough.

It was one the prime minister failed to shake, even as he scrambled to take remedial action by agreeing to publish documents surrounding Mandelson's appointment - albeit with the caveat that international relations and national security should not be compromised.

For many it will be too little, too late.

If you missed it, you can watch the full PMQs here:

Today's session was "an extremely difficult and tense Prime Minister's Questions for Keir Starmer," our political editor Beth Rigby says.

Beth is giving her snap analysis of PMQs live on Paste BN.

"You could sense from the benches, his MPs stony faced there, as they take in the enormity of this Mandelson scandal and how it is ballooning back into the previous Labour government," she says.

Beth points out that Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch got Starmer to admit vetting did raise Peter Mandelson's ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein - which Badenoch described as "shocking".

Beth says some Labour MPs are unsure how to vote on the government's amendment that would carve out any documents that impact national security or international relations.

"There are many, many MPs on [Starmer's] benches, particularly some of the female MPs actually, who feel very strongly that Mandelson should not have been appointed in the first place."

You can watch Beth's full analysis here:

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey uses both his questions to ask about Jeffrey Epstein.

He asks the prime minister whether there will be a public inquiry.

And Davey goes on: "Mr Speaker, the Polish government think Epstein may have been spying for Vladimir Putin.

"Is the prime minister concerned that Peter Mandelson may have been leaking state secrets not just to a paedophile American financier, but also a Russian agent?"

Starmer says: "Well, Mr Speaker, he talks about a public inquiry.

"Obviously, the focus now has to be on the criminal investigation, which has started.

"As he knows, that investigation will go wherever the evidence leads it. 

"And I've made it absolutely clear that the government will cooperate, as he would expect, with that criminal investigation, wherever it goes."

Noticeably, he doesn't address the allegations of Epstein association with Russian intelligence.

Badenoch goes on to question Starmer about the relationship between Morgan McSweeney and Peter Mandelson.

McSweeney is the prime minister's chief of staff and known to have been close to Mandelson.

The PM says McSweeney is "an essential part of my team".

Starmer adds: "He helped me change the Labour Party and win an election.

"Of course I have confidence in him."

The PM then criticises Badenoch for suggesting that cabinet secretary Sir Chris Wormald is not independent.

MPs backing the government's attempt to stop anything that prejudices national security or international relations from being released as part of the Mandelson papers are "voting for a cover up," Kemi Badenoch says.

The Tory leader told MPs: "The national security issue was appointing Mandelson in the first place... humble addresses already exempt genuine national security. 

"This is not about national security. This is about his job security."

She adds:  "[Starmer's] amendment lets him withhold anything to do with international relations."

Challenging Labour MPs, Badenoch says: "If they're voting for it, they are voting for the cover up."

Sir Keir Starmer says he intends to publish all documents related to Peter Mandelson, apart from those that could impact national security and international relations.

He says: "I intend to make sure that all of the material is published... the only exemptions are national security... and anything that would prejudice international relations".

"[There are] of course discussions, country to country, there are very sensitive issues of security, intelligence and trade, which cannot be disclosed without compromising the relationship between the two countries or a third country," he tells MPs.

Starmer also says the police have asked him not to reveal anything that could impact an investigation.

"The Metropolitan Police have been in touch with my office this morning, to raise issues about anything that would prejudice their investigations. We're in discussion with them about that, and I hope to be able to update the House."

Sir Keir Starmer has heavily criticised Peter Mandelson in PMQs.

Responding to a question from the leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, the prime minister says: "To learn that there was a cabinet minister leaking sensitive information at the height of the response to the 2008 crash is beyond infuriating.

"And I am as angry as the public and any member of this House. Mandelson betrayed our country, our Parliament and my party."

He adds: "Mr Speaker, he [Mandelson] lied repeatedly to my team when asked about his relationship with Epstein before and during his tenure as ambassador.

"I regret appointing him. If I knew then what I know now, he would never have been anywhere near government."

Starmer goes on to confirm that he has instructed his team to draft legislation to remove Mandelson's peerage, as well as wider legislation to remove disgraced peers in future.

He adds that he has asked the King to remove Mandelson from the Privy Council.

Starmer appointed Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US in February last year. 

However, he sacked him in September after new emails revealed Mandelson sent messages of support to Epstein even as the paedophile financier faced jail for sex offences in 2008.

Mandelson resigned from the Labour Party earlier this week after more emails between him and Epstein were revealed as part of a tranche of new Epstein documents released by the US Justice Department.

It was also announced yesterday that he would resign his membership of the Lords.

The Metropolitan Police said last night that they would launch an investigation into allegations of misconduct in public office over claims Mandelson shared market sensitive information with Epstein in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crash.