Lord Falconer has been caught in an awkward, evasive exchange on Sky News after repeatedly refusing to answer questions about his friendship with Peter Mandelson, a friend of convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, whilst appearing on the programme to discuss Labour’s push to legalise assisted suicide.
During the interview with presenter Kamali Melbourne, Falconer was pressed on the political fallout surrounding Mandelson but attempted to shut the topic down immediately, saying: “Would you mind if I don’t go there?”
Melbourne replied that he did mind, explaining that the Mandelson controversy was affecting politics and was therefore relevant. But Falconer continued to stonewall, insisting he had come on to talk only about assisted suicide, describing it as “such a big issue, primarily for the people who are affected by it.”
Despite repeated attempts by the presenter to broaden the conversation, Falconer refused to engage, repeating variations of “I won’t go there” and “I’m afraid I won’t”, turning down the question eight times in total.
Melbourne pointed out that they had already spent several minutes discussing assisted suicide and suggested Falconer could at least address the wider political context. Falconer still declined, saying: “It’s a no. I’m not remotely embarrassed, but I do want to talk about assisted suicide.”
The clip, originally filmed in September, has resurfaced online and attracted criticism, with some accusing Falconer of dodging legitimate scrutiny while aggressively promoting major ethical reform.
On top of this, photos from the day Peter Mandelson was sworn in to the House of Lords in 2008 have resurfaced. This was after the first convictions of Jeffrey Epstein, yet he was sworn into the House sponsored by Lord Falconer and Baroness Jay, two of the heavy hitters in the current assisted suicide movement in the upper chamber.
Commenting on the story SPUC’s Communications Manager, Peter Kearney, has said, “There is an irony to Lord Falconer sitting in front of a camera refusing to address an issue which has dealt a near-fatal blow to public trust in the government whilst trying to convince that public that they can trust the government to safely and effectively implement a state suicide service.
“The fact that the Government appear to have disguised a de facto government bill as a private member’s bill suggests transparency around the reality of assisted suicide is not a priority. The Bill’s supporters show little willingness to face scrutiny for their actions.”
If you’re reading this and haven’t yet donated to SPUC, please consider helping now. Thank You!
