Cabinet secretary Sir Chris Wormald has been tasked with conducting an urgent review into former business secretary and US ambassador Peter Mandleson’s dealings with the multi-millionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The probe – which will be supported by Cabinet Office officials – follows the release of new emails over the weekend that suggest Lord Mandelson shared at least one confidential cabinet-level briefing with the late financier, as well other inside tips.
MPs were told yesterday that prime minister Keir Starmer has requested that the review should look at all available information regarding Mandelson’s contact with Epstein during his time as a government minister and report as a “matter of urgency”.
Last night the Metropolitan Police confirmed that it is reviewing “a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office” to see if they require investigation as crimes.
Starmer sacked Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to Washington DC last year after the US Department of Justice released emails indicating that the former minister had not been truthful about his friendship with Epstein, who in 2008 was convicted of solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18.
Epstein served that sentence but died in custody in New York in 2019 while he was awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges.
Over the weekend, the Department of Justice released a further tranche of Epstein-related evidence. Among the roughly 3 million items were details of financial payments seemingly made to Mandelson and further communications between the pair.
One of those communications indicates Mandelson forwarded internal UK government information to Epstein in June 2009, when he was business secretary in the cabinet of Gordon Brown.
‘Breach of trust’
The memo, written by Nick Butler – a policy adviser to the PM in 2009 – suggests a sell-off of government held assets to raise funds against the backdrop of the global financial crisis. The memo prompted a conversation between Epstein and Mandelson about what those opportunities might involve.
Patrick Maguire, chief political commentator at the Times, yesterday quoted Butler saying he was “disgusted by the breach of trust” he presumed was “intended to give Epstein the chance to make money” and that he was considering reporting the matter to the police.
Last year, Brown asked Wormald to investigate exchanges between Mandelson and Epstein following the release of earlier documents. According to the government, Brown’s request related to the sale of Royal Bank of Scotland assets to financial firm JP Morgan, which is the largest bank in the United States. Brown was reportedly told that “no departmental record could be found”.
Darren Jones, who is chief secretary to the prime minister, told parliament yesterday that the UK government had no knowledge of the latest Mandelson-Epstein documents until they were released by the DoJ on Friday.
“The prime minister has today asked the cabinet secretary to review all available information regarding Peter Mandelson’s contact with Jeffrey Epstein during his period as a government minister, and to report back to him as a matter of urgency,” Jones said.
“As the house knows, Peter Mandelson is no longer a member of the Labour Party, having resigned his membership last night, and the house may wish to know that disciplinary action by the Labour Party was under way prior to his resignation.
“The prime minister believes, as do the government, that Peter Mandelson should not retain his membership of the House of Lords or use his title.”
Jones said it would be an “understatement” to say that Mandelson’s decision to continue a close relationship with a convicted paedophile, including discussing private government business, fell “far below the standards expected of any minister”.
He said Mandelson’s behaviour was “unequivocally wrong” and an insult to the women and girls who suffered as Epstein’s victims.
“No government minister of any political party should have behaved or ever should behave in this way,” he said.
Jones said that while Wormald’s earlier review had concluded there were no documents in the government archive, the newly-released documents “account for what took place at the time”.
New review will be ‘broader’
He said Wormald’s new review would search the archive again and do so more broadly covering the whole time that Mandelson was a Labour minister. Jones did not specify a timeframe, but Mandelson had several spells as a cabinet minister between May 1997 and June 2010. He also left government and served as a European Union commissioner during that period, only to return in 2008.
Jones added: “In respect of the cabinet secretary’s work, officials from the propriety and ethics team and elsewhere in the Cabinet Office are of course supporting his investigations in reviewing what documents are available in the archive, because the prime minister has made it very clear that he wishes the cabinet secretary to report back to him as a matter of urgency.”
Alex Burghart, shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, said the investigation into Mandelson’s conduct was not broad enough.
“It is not enough to consider Mandelson’s historical conduct; there also needs to be an investigation into his behaviour while he was our ambassador in Washington,” Burghart said.
“Given that he abused his previous position, it is entirely conceivable that he abused his most recent one. For example, I understand that on 27 February last year, Mandelson arranged for the prime minister to meet Palantir, a client of Mandelson’s company, Global Counsel. How many more such meetings were there, and what other information was shared? We all have a right to know.”
Burghart added that the ministers also needed to be honest about whether the vetting that paved the way for Mandelson to be appointed as ambassador to Washington DC was “the most terrible failure”, and whether concerns were ignored.
A statement subsequently issued by Metropolitan Police Commander Ella Marriott said the force was aware of the latest publication of court documents related to Epstein.
“Following this release and subsequent media reporting, the Met has received a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office,” she said.
“The reports will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation.
"As with any matter, if new and relevant information is brought to our attention we will assess it, and investigate as appropriate."