It was a prescient and – as it turned out – incredibly optimistic sign off from Peter Mandelson after eight years as Chancellor of Manchester Metropolitan University.

“I hope I survive in my next job for at least half that period”, the Financial Times reported him as saying – with a smile.

As something of a serial sackee from government posts, we know Sir Keir Starmer was, to an extent, aware of the risks of appointing the ‘Prince of Darkness’ as his man in Washington.

Politics latest – follow live

But in his first interview since he gave the ambassador his marching orders, the prime minister said if he had “known then what I know now” then he would not have given him the job.

For many Labour MPs, this will do little to answer questions about the slips in political judgement that led Downing Street down this disastrous alleyway.

Like the rest of the world, Sir Keir Starmer did know of Lord Mandelson’s friendship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein when he sent him to Washington.

The business secretary spelt out the reasoning for that over the weekend saying that the government judged it “worth the risk”.

This is somewhat problematic.

As you now have a government which – after being elected on the promise to restore high standards – appears to be admitting that previous indiscretions can be overlooked if the cause is important enough.

Package that up with other scandals that have resulted in departures – Louise Haigh, Tulip Siddiq, Angela Rayner – and you start to get a stink that becomes hard to shift.

But more than that, the events of the last week again demonstrate an apparent lack of ability in government to see round corners and deal with crises before they start knocking lumps out of the Prime Minister.

Remember, for many the cardinal sin here was not necessarily the original appointment of Mandelson (while eyebrows were raised at the time, there was nowhere near the scale of outrage we’ve had in the last week with many career diplomats even agreeing the with logic of the choice) but the fact that Sir Keir walked into PMQs and gave the ambassador his full throated backing when it was becoming clear to many around Westminster that he simply wouldn’t be able to stay in post.

The explanation from Downing Street is essentially that a process was playing out, and you shouldn’t sack an ambassador based on a media enquiry alone.

But good process doesn’t always align with good politics.

Something this barrister-turned-politician may now be finding out the hard way.

Sir Keir Starmer will be “completely exonerated” over the scandal around Peter Mandelson’s relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, Gordon Brown has told Sky News.

The prime minister was forced to sack Lord Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US last Thursday after details of the peer’s relationship with Epstein emerged in the media.

Emails between Lord Mandelson, a minister under Tony Blair and Mr Brown, and the convicted sex offender revealed that the ex-minister sent messages of support to Epstein even as the US financier faced jail for soliciting prostitution from a minor in 2008.

Politics latest: PM speaks for first time since Mandelson sacking

Sir Keir said on Monday that he would have “never appointed” Lord Mandelson as US ambassador if he knew then what he knows now.

But Mr Brown told Sky News’ Darren McCaffrey that he believes the prime minister will be “completely exonerated” once “the record is out” on the matter.

The former prime minister said: “I don’t want to criticise Sir Keir Starmer’s judgement, because he faces very difficult decisions and we’re talking about a very narrow area for timing between a Tuesday and Thursday.

“I think once the record is out, Sir Keir Starmer will be completely exonerated.”

However, Mr Brown did admit that the situation “calls somewhat into his judgement”.

He said: “I think every government goes through difficulties. Probably 15 years ago, when I was in government, you’d be asking me questions about what had happened on a particular day.

“But this is not really in the end about personalities. In the end, it’s about the policies.

“If you ask people in the street, they might say, well, interesting story, terrible thing that happened to these girls, but also they will say, look what’s happening to my life at the moment, what’s happening to my community, what’s happening to my industry, what’s happening to the whole region.

“I think we’ve got to think that politics is about changing people’s lives and making a difference in those areas where they want to do things.”

Sir Keir has insisted that Lord Mandelson went through a proper due diligence process before his appointment.

However, speaking publicly for the first time since he sacked Lord Mandelson on Thursday night, he said: “Had I known then what I know now, I’d have never appointed him.”

Sir Keir said he knew before Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday afternoon that Lord Mandelson had not yet answered questions from government officials, but was unaware of the contents of the messages that led to his sacking.

He said Lord Mandelson did not provide answers until “very late” on Wednesday, which was when he decided he had to be “removed”.