On Monday afternoon, Peter Mandelson was taken in by the Metropolitan Police on suspicion of misconduct in a public office. He was questioned for several hours, then released on bail. The legal question of his guilt or innocence is, of course, entirely a matter for the courts. But the arrest of the “Prince of Darkness”, on the eve of a by-election Labour may lose to either the Green Party or Reform UK, is something close to a symbolic death: the end of centrist moralizing as a viable political mode.

Since the Nineties, “sleaze” has been a favorite weapon in Labour’s attack arsenal against the Conservatives. In a sense, for the last two decades, the party has staked its identity and reputation on ethical superiority. In the run-up to the 2024 general election, for instance, Keir Starmer repeatedly pledged to “restore standards in public life.”

After 14 years of Conservative government, this strategy worked because people were tired of the sex scandals and rolling resignations. Having spent almost a decade and a half in Opposition, and having cleansed itself of accusations of antisemitism leveled at Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, Labour could credibly claim the moral high ground. Mandelson’s arrest, following his resignation from Labour and the Lords over his close relationship with the convicted paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, signals the end of centrist parties making that claim.

This is a lesson that both parties have learned. In 1993, John Major launched “Back to Basics”, a campaign intended to reposition the Tories as a party which cared about decency and community responsibility. Instead, it was largely received as a moral crusade. Major had inadvertently set a trap for the party, as a cascade of personal scandals followed shortly afterwards. By October 1995, 61% of voters agreed the Tories were “very sleazy and disreputable”. This epic failure was instrumental in allowing Labour — advised by Mandelson — to weaponize “sleaze” and win in 1997.

Now, in 2026, it seems as though the tables have turned. A YouGov poll published this month found that 51% of respondents consider Starmer either as sleazy as sleazier than Boris Johnson.

Thursday’s by-election in Gorton and Denton will be Starmer’s first major electoral reckoning since the latest set of scandals began. It was not long ago that Labour won the seat with 50.8% of the vote and a majority of over 13,000. The latest Opinium poll suggests there is a genuine three-way tie between Labour, the Greens and Reform. It would seem that Labour is being squeezed simultaneously from both ends.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and in lieu of centrist morality, Reform has been developing its own ethical basis. Farage often espouses “Judeo-Christian culture”, while the party manifesto declares that “family is the foundation of society.” This week, Reform MP Danny Kruger spoke openly about reversing the Sixties sexual revolution and ending Britain’s “totally unregulated sexual economy”. While not yet fully coherent, it is a moral program predicated upon the renewal of the national community that has been corroded by liberal permissiveness.

The Greens’ ethical platform, meanwhile, relies on Gaza, climate, and the politics of conscience. Its Urdu-language campaign leaflets and videos, circulated this week and explicitly calling on Muslim voters to “punish Labour for Gaza”, are an extraordinary development. This is a party speaking a moral language, explicitly trying to court a particular ethnic bloc.

Neither Reform nor the Greens practice conventional centrist morality, but both are morally animated. The center, by contrast, has collapsed under the weight of well-meaning managerial incompetence.

Mandelson’s downfall is therefore more than a political scandal. It is the moment at which the center officially cedes its place as the arbiter of morality. For 30 years, figures like him set the terms of public life: what “responsible” politics looked like, who belonged inside the tent, and who could be excluded. The question remains as to what a Labour Party bereft of its moralizing fingerwagging has left to offer. The answer so far seems to be promises of economic growth as national renewal, “foundations for change”, seven pillars, six first steps, and a ream of “hubs”.

There is an honest, albeit difficult, third way. Leaving the politics of virtue signaling behind us, perhaps we could strive towards structural morality by reforming the institutions that bring the Government into disrepute regularly. The problem is that this would require a radicalism few would ascribe to Starmer. And, perhaps, a moral impulse which he doesn’t possess below the surface level.

---

Loïc Frémond advises venture capital firms on government relations.

Fremond_

---