After the release of a vast tranche of documents and emails that shed further light on the close relationship between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein, the government has come under intense pressure to release details about its vetting process before Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador in December 2024.
What did Keir Starmer know?
The prime minister confirmed for the first time on Wednesday that he had known about Mandelson’s longer-term relationship with Epstein before appointing him US ambassador, saying the former peer had “lied repeatedly” about the extent of his contact with the late child sex offender.
That Starmer knew Mandelson had kept ties with Epstein after his conviction was widely reported when the former cabinet minister lost his job in Washington in September. A Downing Street source said there had been reports linking Mandelson and Epstein before the appointment, including after the disgraced financier was convicted, which had been looked at as part of the appointment process.
“Peter Mandelson lied to the prime minister, hid information that has since come to light and presented Epstein as someone he barely knew,” said a Downing street source.
New information had revealed in November that the relationship was “materially different”, they said. “He had utterly misled the prime minister. He was swiftly sacked.”
What vetting process did Mandelson go through?
Mandelson underwent a two-stage vetting process. The first was “due diligence” by the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team, which sent a document to No 10 with outstanding questions before his appointment in late 2024.
The document consisted of information in the public domain, including that Mandelson had stayed overnight at Epstein’s house and had an ongoing friendship with him after the latter’s release from prison.
It is understood that Starmer asked Mandelson to address three specific questions after reviewing the file, and that the prime minister’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, sent them to him by email. He was asked why he had continued to have contact with Epstein after his conviction, if he had stayed at one of Epstein’s homes during his incarceration, and whether he associated with an Epstein-backed charity founded by the sex offender’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell.
It appears No 10 was satisfied with his answers at the time and Mandelson was appointed.
Before Mandelson went to Washington he underwent the second, more secretive part of the process. During developed vetting (DV) officials asked questions about sensitive issues including finances, business records, sexual history, foreign travel and personal relationships. The process was intended to establish whether he was being honest about his past, and if not, whether he could be susceptible to coercion.
What was the outcome of the process?
That is, as yet, unknown. At no point in the DV process, which is never made public, was the information shared with any politicians. Instead, it provided a binary decision, with mitigations in place for any areas of concern.
As Mandelson became the US ambassador, it is assumed the DV process gave him the green light. It is unclear whether any mitigations were put in place.
Did Downing Street ask further questions?
No 10 said on Wednesday that it had faith in the vetting process. It is understood that officials did not ask the US Department of Justice to see the Epstein documents before Mandelson’s appointment, and repeatedly dodged questions on whether a request was made to view documents related to Mandelson before they were published.
There have been two major criminal investigations into Epstein, the first in 2008 and the second in 2019, which produced 6m documents, images and videos.
Labour MPs have privately accused No 10 of “distinct incuriosity”, and Kemi Badenoch said during prime minister’s questions that Starmer could not blame the process. “He did know, it was on Google,” the Tory leader said. “If the Conservative research department could find this information out, why couldn’t No 10?”
