UK Government releases first Mandelson files

The UK Government has published the first raft of documents relating to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US.

They confirmed Prime Minister Keir Starmer was warned of a “general reputational risk” over the appointment given Mandelson’s relationship with convicted paedophile and financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Starmer has previously said while he was aware of the relationship, he did not know its “depth and darkness”.

However the files released today include an advisory note sent to the PM highlighting a 2009 report that found Mandelson had a “particularly close relationship” with Epstein, even after the latter’s conviction.

The papers also confirm Mandelson was asked about Epstein during the vetting process, including by Starmer’s now former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney. Information about follow-up questions are not included in this release.

Some documents have been withheld or redacted for national security reasons, with a parliamentary committee responsible for approving what is published.

Other documents will not be published for some time following a request by the Metropolitan Police, which is currently investigating the Labour grandee in relation to suspicion of misconduct in public office.

Mandelson was arrested and questioned on 23 February over the allegations before being released and has since had his bail conditions dropped.

He has denied any wrongdoing, including misconduct in public office, and in relation to the wider issue of his appointment he had insisted he answered questions about his relationship with Epstein accurately.

The files also show that after being sacked as ambassador Mandelson requested a payout of £547,201. He was ultimately paid a settlement of £75,000, a combination of payment in lieu of notice and a special severance payment.

Speaking in the Commons, Cabinet Office minister Darren Jones confirmed the first of the files had been released and further tranches are to come.

He expressed his and colleagues’ “disgust and horror at the nature and extent of the relationship” between Mandelson and Epstein.

He continued: “Whilst the documents point to public reports of an ongoing relationship between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein, the advice did not expose the depth and extent of their relationship which only became apparent after the release of further files by Bloomberg and then the United States' Department of Justice.

“After the prime minister reviewed the Cabinet Office due diligence that notes public reporting on Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, questions were put to Peter Mandelson by advisers in Number 10… and Peter Mandelson responded.

“These are matters that are currently the subject of an ongoing police investigation and we will publish this document when the investigation allows. When we do, the House will be able to see Peter Mandelson’s answers for themselves which the prime minister regrets believing.

“Peter Mandelson should never had been afforded the privilege of representing this country, and I reiterate for the House that the prime minister deeply regrets taking him at his word. It was a mistake to do so.”

Jones accepted that due diligence process “fell short” of what was required and work was now underway to improve it.

Responding for the Conservatives, Alex Burghart MP said the government had to be “dragged” into releasing the files. He was also critical of the prime minister not making the Common’s statement, given it was his decision to appoint Mandelson.

He added: “It’s very clear that [Epstein’s] victims were not in the prime minister’s mind when he appointed Peter Mandelson.”