Police to review latest claim about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s links to Epstein
British police are to review fresh allegations that Jeffrey Epstein provided Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor with a woman to have sex with at the Royal Lodge in 2010.
The woman has claimed she spent the night at the then prince’s residence in Windsor, her US lawyer, Brad Edwards, said after the allegations surfaced over the weekend. The woman, who is not British, was in her 20s at the time, and was later given a tour of Buckingham Palace, it is further alleged.
A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “We are aware of reports about a woman said to have been taken to an address in Windsor in 2010 for sexual purposes. We are assessing the information in line with our established procedures.
“We take any reports of sexual crimes extremely seriously and encourage anyone with information to come forward. At this time, these allegations have not been reported to Thames Valley police by either the lawyer [of the woman] or their client.”
Thames Valley is looking at the case as the Royal Lodge is in the area covered by the force. The review does not necessarily mean a criminal investigation will take place.
Mountbatten-Windsor has always denied wrongdoing.
Jeffrey Epstein described Peter Mandelson as “devious” after lobbying a bank to underwrite a mining project launched by their mutual friend Nat Rothschild, emails included in the latest tranche of Epstein files suggest, writes Daniel Boffey and Emine Sinmaz.
In April 2010, the then business secretary appears to have contacted banker Jes Staley, then at JP Morgan, from his personal email account in what appears to be an attempt to secure funding for Rothschild, Mandelson’s longtime friend.
Mandelson wrote to say that he was pleased to hear that JP Morgan was “planning” to underwrite a £700m investment vehicle being launched by Rothschild, a scion of the banking dynasty.
“I’ve been following my friend Nat Rothschild’s plans to list a vehicle on the [London Stock Exchange] and I’m very happy that JPM are now planning to get involved as book runners alongside [Credit Suisse],” Mandelson wrote to Staley. “I think it’s a great idea from what I see of the global mining business (and their prices). I hope it all goes well. Best Easter greetings to you and your family”.
Mandelson appears to have shared the communication with Epstein, who was a close friend of Staley’s, adding that he hoped “Jes can send warm response to this informal email”. Epstein responded: “You are sooooooooooooooo devious”.
The two-child limit has moved a step closer to being scrapped after legislation cleared the first stage in Parliament.
The policy, introduced under the Conservatives in 2017, was branded a political exercise in division between the “deserving and undeserving poor” during a debate in the Commons ahead of Tuesday’s vote.
MPs voted 458 to 104, majority 354,to scrap the policy, ensuring the Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill passed at second reading.
It will be further scrutinised by MPs and peers before it can become law, but the government has said it wants to ditch the two-child limit from April.
The policy currently restricts child tax credit and universal credit (UC) to the first two children in most households, and campaigners have argued 109 children across the UK are pulled into poverty by the policy every day.
The change, if the Bill passes into law, would mean families can receive the child element of UC for all children, regardless of family size.
On a brisk Monday evening in May 2010, Gordon Brown stood on the steps of Downing Street and delivered one of the most dramatic announcements of the New Labour era: his resignation as UK prime minister, writes Kalyeena Makortoff and Graeme Wearden.
The decision came days after a nail-biting general election that left no single party with a clear run at No 10. Brown kept his decision, which followed days of political wrangling, to a tight inner circle. Nick Clegg, who would go on to serve as deputy prime minister of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, was formally told of Brown’s resignation only 10 minutes before the announcement.
But across the pond, a man named Jeffrey Epstein, a well-connected financier and convicted child sex offender, had been briefed hours before. “Finally got him to go today …” an email believed to be sent by Peter Mandelson informed Epstein on Monday morning.
The apparent tip-off, revealed in the latest tranche of the Epstein files, not only gave Epstein an inside track on the UK’s political future, but also on large moves that were to ripple through global markets.
Those included further wild swings in the value of the British pound, which had already been volatile in the lead-up to the 6 May general election. It fell 2.2% on the day of the vote, its worst day in over a year, illustrating how concerned traders were about the risk of a hung parliament and political instability.
On the day of Mandelson’s apparent tip-off to Epstein, the pound rose by more than two cents to $1.505, before losing all its gains as Brown’s resignation – and his plan for Labour to hold coalition talks with Clegg’s Liberal Democrats – sent shock waves through Westminster. Sterling would gain back a cent a day later, as the Lib Dems struck a deal with the Tories, handing the keys of No 10 to the Conservative leader David Cameron.
While there is no evidence that anyone traded off the leaks, it is just one example of the kind of inside information that Mandelson is alleged to have shared with Epstein, according to the latest batch of documents released by the US Department of Justice this week.
The government said it will provide any support the Metropolitan Police needs in its criminal investigation into allegations Lord Peter Mandelson leaked confidential information to Jeffrey Epstein.
A Government spokesperson said: “The Government stands ready to provide whatever support and assistance the police need.”
Badenoch added: “He [Starmer] knew all of this long before the investigations were required and he still did that.
“He has a lot of questions to answer and he should not try and distract anyone by talking about removing peerages or investigations.
“The Prime Minister himself should be answering questions about how this happened.”
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said it is “right” there is a full criminal investigation into allegations Peter Mandelson passed market sensitive information to Jeffrey Epstein, but told broadcasters it “should not distract from the fact that the Prime Minister appointed a man who was the close friend and associate of a notorious and convicted paedophile”.
Police begin criminal investigation into Mandelson allegations
A criminal investigation has been launched into allegations Peter Mandelson passed market-sensitive information to the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, police said on Tuesday evening.
Commander Ella Marriott, from the Metropolitan Police, said: “Following the further release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the United States Department of Justice, the Met received a number of reports into alleged misconduct in public office including a referral from the UK Government.
“I can confirm that the Metropolitan Police has now launched an investigation into a 72-year-old man, a former Government Minister, for misconduct in public office offences.
“The Met will continue to assess all relevant information brought to our attention as part of this investigation and won’t be commenting any further at this time.”
Mandelson has previously said: “I was wrong to believe Epstein following his conviction [in 2008 for procuring a child for prostitution and of soliciting a prostitute] and to continue my association with him afterwards. I apologise unequivocally for doing so to the women and girls who suffered.”
Updated
Lord Mandelson to face criminal investigation
A criminal investigation has been launched into allegations that Lord Peter Mandelson passed market-sensitive information to Jeffrey Epstein.
Files released by the US Department of Justice apparently showed Mandelson allegedly passing material to Epstein while serving as business secretary in Gordon Brown’s Labour administration as it dealt with the 2008 financial crash and its aftermath.
The Cabinet Office had passed material to the police after an initial review of documents released as part of the Epstein files found they contained “likely market-sensitive information” and official handling safeguards had been “compromised”.
The Metropolitan police are to formally launch a criminal investigation into allegations that Peter Mandelson leaked Downing Street emails and market sensitive information to the child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the Guardian understands.
Updated
Early evening summary
Reform UK has been branded racist for arguing that the two-child benefit cap should be lifted only for those families where both parents are British-born and in full-time work, PA Media reports. The Green MP Siân Berry told MPs she wanted to “utterly reject the racist agenda of the Reform members’ objections”. Meanwhile, Conservative former minister Kit Malthouse said Reform is calling for “open discrimination” and pointed out that the policy would affect his own children and the children of sitting Reform MPs. He said: “There is something grotesque about seeking legislation which seeks to downgrade the citizenship of your own children.” Reform MP Sarah Pochin backed her party’s policy, arguing that removing the two-child benefit cap entirely rewards those who “play the system”. They were speaking as the Commons debated the government bill to get rid of the two-child benefit cap. Ministers say the move will take 450,000 children out of poverty. Reform UK announced that, instead of spending £3bn on getting rid of the cap, they would keep it and spend the money instead on financial support for pubs. (See 2.18pm.)
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
Updated
In November last year Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, announced plans to change UK settlement rules which result in many migrants having to wait twice as long as they do now – 10 years, not five years – before they can qualify for indefinite leave to remain.
There was relatively little Labour protest at the time but, as Emilio Casalicchio and Noah Keate report in their London Playbook briefing for Politico, anger about the plans erupted yesterday in a debate in Westminster Hall.
They report:
Dozens of backbenchers lined up last night to hammer the government in public, over a proposal to double the settlement wait to a full decade, and up to two decades for some. People who arrived on post-Brexit health and social care visas will need to wait 15 years, for example.
Labour MPs said it would be “un-British” to “move the goalposts,” while warning the plan could hobble public services, undermine businesses and damage the U.K. reputation abroad. The criticisms were aired from across the Labour movement during a packed Westminster Hall debate.
Folkestone MP Tony Vaughan said the proposals are a “breach of trust” for migrants who arrived under existing rules. “It makes Britain look unpredictable and like a country that does not keep its word,” he said.
Former minister and Starmer pal Tulip Siddiq said it would be “shameful” to row back on existing rules, while Labour ex-frontbencher Gareth Thomas said the proposals “would be the height of unfairness.”
Here is video of Michael Forsyth, the lord speaker, telling peers that Peter Mandelson is retiring.
Violent and extremist inmates to be kept in supermax-style prison units, Lammy tells MPs
Violent and extremist inmates will be kept in new supermax-style prison units, David Lammy, the justice secretary has announced. PA Media says:
Offenders kept in the units will face tougher conditions inspired by supermax prisons in the United States.
The move comes after Manchester Arena bomb plotter Hashem Abedi allegedly carried out a “terrorist” attack on prison officers at a maximum security jail with hot cooking oil and makeshift weapons.
David Lammy said a review by Jonathan Hall KC into the alleged attack on three prison guards at HMP Frankland in 2025 had showed improvements were needed.
He said separation centres, special units inside prisons to house Islamic extremists, would be transformed with a new tiered system.
Separation centres were created in 2017 to isolate extremist offenders from the mainstream prison population.
Prisons that currently have the centres are HMP Full Sutton near York, HMP Frankland in County Durham, and HMP Woodhill in Milton Keynes.
Staff working in such units will receive specialist training, and intelligence collection will be sped up, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) outlined.
Movement between the tiers will only be possible after “rigorous risk assessments”, the MoJ said.
Abedi, who was convicted over the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing which killed 22 people, was transferred from Frankland, in Durham, to Belmarsh prison in south-east London following the alleged attack.
Three prison officers were taken to hospital with serious injuries following the incident.
Abedi denied the attack when he appeared at the Old Bailey last year.
Lammy said the government had accepted all 13 recommendations made by Hall.
Gordon Brown writes to Met to back case for investigation into Mandelson's 'inexcusable and unpatriotic' leaking
The former prime minister Gordon Brown has written to the Metropolitan police with information to back the case for a criminal investigation into Peter Mandelson.
In a statement, Brown said:
I have today written to the Met Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, with information relevant to his investigation of Lord Mandelson’s disclosure of market sensitive and confidential government information to the American financier, Jeffrey Epstein, an inexcusable and unpatriotic act at a time when the whole government and country were attempting to address the global financial crisis that was damaging so many livelihoods.
I have sent Sir Mark correspondence, exchanged between myself and the cabinet secretary last year, and I have also passed over information arising from it that may be important in his current investigation.
I have included the letter I sent in September 2025 asking the cabinet secretary to investigate the veracity of information contained in the Epstein papers regarding the sale of assets arising from the banking collapse and communications about them between Lord Mandelson and Mr Epstein.
I have also included the November 2025 response from the cabinet secretary who said about this that ‘no records of information or correspondence from Lord Mandelson’s mailbox’ could be found.
Having drawn their attention to relevant evidence, the matter now rests in the hands of the police.
Updated
Wes Streeting defends No 10 over Mandelson's appointment, saying it couldn't have known full extent of Epstein links
Some Labour MPs opposed to Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, are eager to blame him for the Peter Mandelson debacle. Mandelson and McSweeney formed something of a mutual admiration club in the period before the general election, they have a shared contempt for the Labour left, and McSweeney has been credited with persuading Starmer to make the peer an ambassador, despite the misgivings of others in Downing Street.
In an article for the i, Kitty Donaldson says some Labour MPs want to make McSweeney the “sacrificial lamb” after this scandal. She writes:
“No one is going to move against Keir before May, but after that, he will need a sacrificial lamb to save his premiership,” a government source told The i Paper.
“I just feel like a high-profile person’s got to go, maybe Rachel [Reeves] or maybe Morgan, because it’s either the PM, or somebody close to him. Rachel is in a better position than she was because people [Labour MPs] liked the budget” …
“This idea has been floating around for a while that Keir will have to get rid of someone after May. Ideally, he’d have a reshuffle, but he probably won’t have the authority to do that,” another government source said.
“The Mandelson stuff over the weekend has brought this idea up again because obviously Morgan was the main person pushing for his appointment.”
In an interview with Radio 5 Live today, Wes Streeting argued that no one in Downing Street could be blamed for the fact that Mandelson did not tell the whole truth about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein before he was made an ambassador. Streeting seemed to be defending both Starmer himself, and McSweeney.
Streeting said:
In terms of his appointment to be US ambassador, I can’t see how it would have been known or could have been known, the full extent of Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein or indeed the fact that he was passing sensitive and market-sensitive information to this man whilst as a serving government minister. I don’t think that could have be known and should have be known.
And if anyone is in any doubt about the judgment and integrity of this prime minister, they can judge him by his actions, making sure the ambassador was woken up in the middle of the night and was put on a plane back to London and recalled as our ambassador. That was swift, it was decisive, and Keir Starmer acted immediately upon knowing that the assurances that he had received through the vetting process had turned out to be false reassurances.
In the Commons yesterday Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, suggested Mandelson lied in his declaration of interests before his appointment.
Updated
Labour has criticised Nigel Farage for refusing to disown Tommy Robinson’s endorsement in the Gorton and Denton byelection. (See 3.33pm.) A Labour spokesperson said:
Nigel Farage’s refusal to reject and denounce Tommy Robinson’s endorsement of Matt Goodwin tells you all you need to know about what’s at stake in the Gorton and Denton byelection.
It really shouldn’t be that difficult for Reform to say they don’t welcome the backing of an appalling far-right activist like Robinson. Voters will be left with no choice but to assume they’re happy to have his support.
No 10 welcomes Mandelson's decision to leave House of Lords
Downing Street has welcomed the news that Peter Mandelson has retired from the House of Lords. A No 10 spokesperson said:
It is right that Peter Mandelson will no longer be a member of the House of Lords.
As the prime minister said this morning, Peter Mandelson let his country down.
Updated
Farage defends Reform UK donations from firm with links to foreign-born billionaire, saying they're 'perfectly legitimate'
The final question, or questions, at the Nigel Farage press conference came from my colleague Peter Walker.
Q: Tommy Robinson has endorsed Reform UK in the Gorton and Denton byelection. Matt Goodwin, the candidate, has not disowned him. Should he?
Farage said he did not think endorsements matter. Tommy Robinson could do what he liked. Farage said he was not bothered.
Q: Can you explain why your party is getting so much money from John Simpson, as explained in the Sunday Times story at the weekend? (See 2.07pm.)
Farage said that he did not know Simpson. He was not one of his contacts, he said.
But he said he knew most of the party’s donors, certainly the big ones. “And you will be finding out a lot more about that, of course, in a few weeks’ time, when the Q1 figures are published, and you’ll be perhaps quite surprised by what you see.”
Farage said he did check out the Sunday Times story. “Everything’s legal, everything’s above board,” he said. He said people could speculate about Simpson “till the cows come home”, but he was a “perfectly legitimate donor”.
Farage says defection from Labour he promised still 'work in progress'
At his press conference Nigel Farage was asked happened to the Labour defector was was promising a few weeks ago.
Farage claimed that was a “work in progress”. He said the party was talking to two or three “formerly quite senior Labour figures” about possible defections.
Q: You don’t want foreigners to have benefits. If you were PM, and a foreign person lost their job, what would your advice to them be?
Farage advises the questioner to read the Swedish newspapers today. They are getting rid of indefinite leave to remain, he says.
This is the statement that Michael Forsyth, the lord speaker, read out announcing that Peter Mandelson has quit the Lords.
My lords, given the public interest, and for the convenience of the house, I have decided to inform the house that the clerk of the parliaments has today received notification from Lord Mandelson of his intention to retire from the house efffective from 4 February. I will formally notify this to the house tomorrow in the usual way.
Mandelson to give up membership of House of Lords - but his peerage not affected
Peter Mandelson is to step down from the House of Lords.
The move was announced in the Lords by the Lord Speaker, Michael Forsyth.
This means he will no longer be a member, and entitled to take part in its proceedings.
But he will keep his title, and he will still be entitled to call himself Lord Mandelson.
Q: Did you know Nick Candy, your treasurer, had a friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell?
Yes, says Farage. He says Candy had been friendly with her for years.
Nick knows everybody. Nick is another great networker and he’s very, very good at it.
Farage says he was surprised the government did not invite him in to pick his brains about Donald Trump. That would have been in the national interest, and he would have been happy to help. But Labour would not do that because their “contempt” for him was so strong, he claims.
Farage declines debate challenge from Green party leader Zack Polanski
Q: Zack Polanski, the Green party leader, is challenging you to a debate. Will you accept?
No, says Farage. He says if you pick a fight with a chimney sweep, you get covered in soot.
At his press conference Nigel Farage acknowledges that he is mentioned 37 times in the Epstein files. But he says he never met Jeffrey Epstein. He say Nick Candy, the party’s treasurer, exchanged emails with Epstein, over a potential property sale. But Farage says he is not aware of anyone else in his party having dealings with Epstein.
EU has ‘open mind’ on UK customs union talks, says official
The European Commission would be “open-minded” to discussing closer trade ties with the UK, including a customs union, a senior EU official has said. Jennifer Rankin has the story.
At his press conference Nigel Farage says tightening the drink driving laws is “not even in the top 50” of issues facing the country. The government should drop the plans for this, he says. He claims it will harm pubs without delivering any benefits.
Peter Mandelson used a private BT email address to correspond with government colleagues, Steven Swinford from the Times reports. He says:
We initially thought he forwarded government emails to his BT internet account then passed them on to Epstein
In fact two senior government sources say he was corresponding with ministers and officials using his BT internet account. The messages went directly to his Blackberry, and he sent them straight on to Epstein
That email address is now defunct and the Cabinet Office has no was of retrieving the messages on it
It sounds like a pretty extraordinary security breach, with fundamental implications for government record-keeping
When it is put to him that Kent county council has not save much money throught its Reform-led Doge unit, Farage claims that is “cobblers”. He says Kent has saved over £100m already, and will save several hundred million more.
Farage says, as a trade commissioner in Brussels, Peter Mandelson was very impressive. He was “incrediby well briefed”. In all his time there, he never saw anyone as good, he says.
Asked if Reform UK would back a Tory bid to force the government to publish information relating to Mandelson’s vetting process (see 11.32am), he says they probably would.
Q: Do you think the police should investigate Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor over sex trafficking?
Farage says, if there is evidence to justify an investigation, it should take place.
Q: You offered to help Peter Mandelson when he was ambassador. Does that reflect badly on you, given how it turned out.
Farage says he thought there was far more qualified, with better links to the Trump administration, who should have got the job. He is talking about himself.
Q: There is an email exchange in the Epstein files in which Steve Bannon says he is an adviser to you. Is that right?
Farage says he first met Bannon more than 10 years ago. He has met him many times. He listens to what he does, as do others on the right. But he has had no formal relationship with him, he says.
Q: What would you about peers who disgrace themselves?
Farage says the legislation is out of date, so that may be a case for improving the system. But he does not think this is the issue of the day.
At the Reform UK press conference Nigel Farage is now taking questions.
Q: Would you back legislation to remove Peter Mandelson’s peerage?
Farage says he does not think the peerage is the main issue. But he says that if Jeffrey Epstein received information that might have allowed him to make millions on the bond markets, that may have been criminal.
He also says in one of the emails there was a reference to the security apparatus in Whitehall. So there could have been a breach of the Official Secrets Act.
(Farage seems to be referring to an email talking about a tunnel linking Downing Street with the MoD, which is something that is not particularly secret. It has been written about before.)
Updated
Reform UK says it would re-impose two-child benefit cap for most families to fund £3bn support package for pubs
In the Commons MPs are now debating the bill to get rid of the two-child benefit cap. Ministers say that, by the end of this parliament, this will remove 450,000 children from relative poverty.
At the Reform UK press conference, Lee Anderson has just outlined the his party’s plan to help pubs. He said it would cost £3bn. And he said Reform UK would fund this by repealing the bill to remove the two-child benefit cap.
This means the party would reimpose the cap for most families. The only exceptions would be for families where both parents were British and working full-time.
UPDATE: There are five elements of the Reform UK plan for pubs. They are: halving VAT to 10% for the hospitality sector; scrapping the employer national insurance increase for hospitality businesses; cutting beer duty by 10%; implementing staggered business rate abolition for pubs; and changing regulation to support landlords, including making local ownership models more viable.
Updated
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, and Lee Anderson, the Reform MP, are holding a press conference to discuss their plans to save pubs. There is a live feed here.
Presumably they will be asked about a report by Gabriel Pogrund in the Sunday Times at the weekend saying that “a churchwarden from Potters Bar who works for the family of a highly secretive, Kazakhstan-born billionaire can be revealed as the man behind £200,000 of donations to Reform UK”.
Pogrund said:
John Richard Simpson is a 59-year-old conveyancer whose parish website describes him as an “experienced” and “dedicated” Anglican lay leader.
He is the owner of Interior Architecture Landscape Limited, which made seven payments to Nigel Farage’s party last summer. The firm, which was originally owned via a trust in the British Virgin Islands, is so small it does not have to file professionally audited accounts …
Simpson has long worked for Sasan and Yasmin Ghandehari, a married couple who a spokesman for the interior design company acknowledged were “clients”.
Sasan Ghandehari is an Iranian-born billionaire. As Rowena Mason and Heather Stewart reported last month, a trust he runs funded Farage’s trip to Davos.
Rowena has written about the mysterious John Simpson before. Last year she revealed that his company gave £100,000 to Reform UK even though it had faced a winding-up petition from the tax authorities earlier in the year.
Starmer tells cabinet public find it 'gobsmacking' for politicians like Mandelson to say they can't recall big gifts of money
Keir Starmer told cabinet this morning that what Peter Mandelson had done was bad for the reputation of all politicians.
At the lobby briefing, setting out what happened at cabinet this morning, the PM’s spokesperon said:
The prime minister opened cabinet by addressing recent developments relating to Peter Mandelson.
The prime minister said he was appalled at the information that had emerged over the weekend in the Epstein files.
He said the alleged passing on the emails of highly sensitive government business was disgraceful, adding that he was not reassured that the totality of the information had yet emerged.
The prime minister told cabinet that Peter Mandelson should no longer been in the House of Lords or use the title, and said that he had asked the cabinet secretary to review all available information regarding Mandelson’s contacts with Jeffrey Epstein during his time serving as a government minister.
He said he’d made it clear the government would cooperate with the police in any inquiries they carried out.
He said the government had to press and go further, working at speed in the Lords, including legislatively if necessary.
He reiterated that there was a need to move at pace.
The prime minister said Peter Mandelson had led his country down. He added the public don’t really see individuals in this scandal, they see politicians. For the public to see politicians saying they can’t recall receiving significant sums of money is just gobsmacking, causing them to lose faith in all politicians and weakening trust still further.
The prime minister said that was why moving quickly in this matter was vital.
When Starmer told colleagues that he thought the “totality” of the information about Mandelson’s links with Jeffrey Epstein had yet to emerge, it is understood he was referring to the fact that, with so much documentation to go through (3m items), there must be more to come out – not that he had knowledge of anything specific.
Updated
No 10 says police being asked to investigate leaks to Epstein because they contained market sensitive information
This is what the PM’s spokesperson told reporters at the lobby briefing this morning about the Cabinet Office’s decision to ask the police to investigate the leaking of government information by Peter Mandelson to Jeffrey Epstein. The spokesperson said:
An initial review of the documents released in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Department of Justice has found that they contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and the official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.
Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information in strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially.
It appears these safeguards were compromised.
In light of this information, the Cabinet Office has referred this material to the police and it is rightly for the police to determine whether to investigate.
It is understood that the referral to the police was made today.
The Cabinet Office has acted in response to emails from Epstein that have been released as part of a cache of 3m Epstein documents released at the end of last week. They included correspondence with Mandelson. Some emails have been released that show Mandelson directly forwarding government memos to Epstein. And there are other documents that show Epstein getting confidential No 10 documents, written at the time when Mandelson was business secretary, but without the email chain showing how he obtained them.
And as I’ve said, and as the Prime Minister has indicated, a cabinet this morning, the government stands ready to provide whatever support and assistance placing it.
Updated
Starmer gets officials to draft legislation to remove Mandelson's peerage, as No 10 asks police to investigate his leaks to Epstein
Keir Starmer has asked officials to draw up legislation that would strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage. Yesterday No 10 said that Starmer wanted Mandelson kicked out of the House of Lords for good, but you can be expelled from the Lords and remain a peer because removing a peerage requires an act of parliament and there is no precedent for a bill like this being passed just to de-peer an individual.
Yesterday No 10 suggested that passing a law to stop Mandelson being able to call himself Lord Mandelson would be too complicated or time-consuming. Today No 10 says Starmer has asked officials to show him how it could be done.
At the No 10 lobby briefing today, the PM’s spokesperson also revealed that the government has asked the police to investigate suspicions that Mandelson broke insider trading rules when he passed government information to Jeffrey Epstein. The spokesperson said that it would be for the police to decide whether or not to launch a formal investigation.
Referring to possible legislation to remove Mandelson’s peerage, the PM’s spokesperson said:
The prime minister has asked officials to draft legislation which allows Peter Mandelson’s peerage to be removed as quickly as possible.
The prime minister believes there is a broader need for the House of Lords to be able to remove transgressors more quickly.
The prime minister regards it as ridiculous that a peerage cannot be removed except with primary legislation, something that has not happened since 1917.
He thinks that in no other walk of life are you unsackaable unless a law is passed. He thinks that the country expects the process for removing lords to be fit for purpose, and in line with expectations.
The government will publish proposals as soon as possible to tackle this issue, and calls on opposition parties to support reforms to modernise house procedures in order to meet public expectations.
The spokesperson did not give any futher details of what this legislation might look like. Earlier today Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, said a bill would be very straightforward. (See 10.09am.) The spokesperson said the PM still wants Mandelson to give an assurance that he will not return to the House of Lords.
Updated
The Conservatives are not backing calls for legislation to strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage, my colleague Jessica Elgot reports.
Understand Tories won’t create or back a bill to remove Mandelson’s peerage. There is unease among politicians in Westminster about the precedent of a government using its large majority to go after individuals, no matter how egregious. But mechanisms should still be there to expel him.
Updated
Former PM David Cameron accuses Labour of taking 'spite-laden wrecking ball' to Tories's free schools project
This afternoon peers will debate the children’s wellbeing and schools bill. David Cameron, the former prime minister, does not comment on domestic politics very often these days, but he has used a long article in the Daily Telegraph to condemn the bill, claiming that it will undermine one of his government’s key achievements.
Cameron says that, as opposition leader before 2010, he chose to back Tony Blair’s decision to roll out academy schools, even though the plans were controversial within Labour and it would have been easier for the Tories to oppose them. And Cameron says in government he went further, setting up free schools. He goes on:
And [free schools] are not a sideshow – there are over 750 of them, teaching 275,000 mainstream students. The results? Better than established state schools for reading, maths, GCSE results and A levels – 28.8 per cent of pupils at free schools go on to a top-third higher education destination, compared to 26.3 per cent at all state-funded mainstream schools.
The Starmer government’s response to all this has been to take a spite-laden wrecking ball to the entire project.
The next generation of free schools all budgeted and ready to go? Axed. 46 projects cancelled – 18 of them special schools, with a further 59 vital special and alternative provision projects hanging in the balance. Even my old school, Eton, had its Eton Star Academy in Middlesbrough cancelled. Labour’s message to aspirational parents and pupils in Middlesbrough? “Know your place.”
As for the academies, Labour are systematically dismantling the freedoms that helped them to succeed.
Responding to the Cameron article, a Labour source told the Telegraph that it was “the usual overwrought claptrap” and that the children’ wellbeing and schools bill would “drive improvement for every child in the country”.
UPDATE: Not all assessments of free schools have been as positive as Cameron’s. This report suggests the government over-paid when buying sites for them in London. And in 2024 Sam Freedman published a fair overall assessment of the Conservative’s record on education for the Sutton Trust.
Updated
The Department for Work and Pensions has named 12 disability experts with “lived experience of disability or long-term health conditions” who will sit on the steering group of the review looking at the future of the personal independence payment (Pip), a disability benefit. Stephen Timms, the minister leading the review, says:
Disabled people deserve a system that truly supports them to live with independence and dignity, and that fairly reflects the reality of their lives today.
That’s why we’re putting disabled people at the heart of this review – ensuring their voices shape the changes that will help them achieve better health, greater independence, and access to the right support when they need it.
The Conservatives have an opposition day debate scheduled for tomorrow, which means they get to choose the motion before the Commons. Sam Coates from Sky News says they may use it to force a vote on disclosure of vetting information relating to Peter Mandelson.
* Could we see a crunch point as soon as tomorrow over Mandelson?
* Tories have an opposition day debate - could they force a vote on Mandelson vetting disclosure. Shadow cabinet sources tell me they’re thinking about it
* Labour MPs tell me they COULD vote for it. They don’t think they can block transparency about Mandelson
* But some Labour MPs also want to use it to embarrass Morgan McSweeney. “If this vote gets rid of the ginger guy, we will go for it” said one Labour MP.
* Other Labour MPs are circling the wagons to protect McSweeney for getting Labour in government
No final decisions from Conservatives yet - but watch this space
Mandelson says government had 'serious wobble' last year about case for its Chagos Islands deal
In his Times interview with Katy Balls, Peter Mandelson also revealed that, after he was appointed ambassador to the US, the UK had a “serious wobble” about the case for the deal transferring sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.
Balls reports:
One of Mandelson’s tasks as US ambassador was trying to get the administration onside over the Chagos Islands deal, which last month Trump denounced on social media and the UK government is trying to salvage. Mandelson was “mildly horrified” to see his work undone so spectacularly.
He worked hard to secure Republican backing for the deal. But just as it was coming together in the spring of 2025, he “became aware of a serious wobble in London over the agreement and its sellability to the British public.
“That was to do with the price tag and whether we had the total legal obligation to enter the deal and whether the original legal case made for the agreement in Whitehall was as watertight as was claimed. So on the one hand I faced a sceptical US administration and then at another point a wobbly government of my own behind me.”
The government seems to have got over its wobble. Keir Starmer defended the deal after Donald Trump attacked it last month, and in China last week he was telling journalists that the US intelligence agencies backed it too.
Children with cancer in England to have travel costs paid under government scheme
Karin Smyth, the secondary care minister, was giving interviews this morning to promote a government initiative that will ensure that families with children who have cancer in England will have treatment-related travel costs covered. PA Media reports:
The National Cancer Plan, which will be fully unveiled today, sets out how children and young people up to the age of 24 and their families will qualify for travel costs to and from appointments, regardless of income.
It is unclear whether there will be a cap on costs per family. The Department of Health said this will be looked at as the scheme is designed.
According to the Department of Health, the fund is part of a wider package to transform young people’s cancer care, with improvements to diagnosis, expanded genomic testing to better access to clinical trials and more psychological support.
Young cancer patients in hospital can also expect to be offered a better range of food suited to their tastes, including outside of mealtimes.
Charities welcomed the move, with Rachel Kirby-Rider, chief executive officer of Young Lives vs Cancer, saying: “Young Lives vs Cancer has been campaigning for almost a decade for a young cancer patient travel fund. Today’s announcement of dedicated travel costs support is a huge step forward in transforming the lives of children and young people with cancer and their families.
“Up until now, young people and families have been going into debt and even missing treatment because of the extra £250 every month just to travel to hospital. We’re ready to work with the Government to make this a success.”
What Met is doing in response to calls for Mandelson to face criminal investigation
Vikram Dodd is the Guardian’s police and crime correspondent.
What the Metropolitan police has announced in relation to Peter Mandelson is known within the force as a “scoping exercise”.
The announcement of a review is far from a definite decision that Britain’s biggest force will investigate Lord Mandelson.
But what they will now do is examine the material about Mandelson and see whether there is an apparent case that it breaks the law in England and Wales concerning misconduct in public office.
If the review or scoping exercise develops, detectives are likely to consult lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service, which brings prosecutions in England and Wales.
The CPS says of misconduct in public office:
The offence concerns serious wilful abuse or neglect of the power or responsibilities of the public office held. There must be a direct link between the misconduct and an abuse of those powers or responsibilities.
The Met statement last night came from Cmdr Ella Marriott, who is attached to specialist crime. That is the same part of the Met whose review in December led to a decision that allegations against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor that he had sex with a woman trafficked to London by Jeffrey Epstein did not merit a criminal investigation.
The Met says it is keen to stay out of party politics and the demands Mandelson face criminal investigation came from rival parties.
Tories join calls for inquiry into Mandelson
The Conservatives are also calling for a public inquiry into Peter Mandelson. This is what Alex Burghart, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, told Sky News this morning.
The government should hold a full inquiry into the public life of Peter Mandelson that touches on, not just what he was doing in 2009 [when he was in government and leaking some internal memos to Jeffrey Epstein], but also gets to the bottom of how he was appointed in the first place [as an ambassador]. Because when he was appointed, it was known that he had this long, unhealthy relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
The Lib Dems are also calling for an inquiry. (See 10.09am.)
Harman says Lords should pass motion saying Mandelson not welcome back, and he should be kicked off privy council
Harriet Harman, who was deputy Labour leader when Gordon Brown was prime minister, told the Today programme this morning that she always had her doubts about Peter Mandelson. “I was of the view that Peter Mandelson was untrustworthy from the 1990s,” she said.
As for what should happen now, Harman backed what No 10 was proposing yesterday, trying to ensure that Mandelson is permanently removed from the House of Lords.
But she also said that Starmer should be “advising the king to stop him from being a privy counsellor”.
She said that she would like to see the Lords pass a motion saying that Mandelson, who is currently on leave of absence from the house (which means he has temporarily suspended his membership, and cannot participate in its proceedings), would not be welcome if he applies to come back.
And, asked if she backed legislation to strip Mandelson of his peerage, Harman said this could be done alongside the wider reforms to Lords disciplinary process that Starmer wants to see. She said:
I don’t think it matters that a number of things are being done concurrently.
There is the police investigation, there’s the issue of his privy counsellorship, there’s the question of his readmission after temporary absence from the House of Lords, there’s the question of primary legislation to strip him of his title, but there’s also the question of changing the rules to make the House of Lords processes modern and much less cumbersome.
Alice Lilley from the Institute for Government thinktank has a good explainer here that sets out what needs to happen for someone to be removed from the House of Lords, and for them to lose their peerage.
Updated
Ed Davey calls for public inquiry into Mandelson
This is what Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, told the Today programme this morning about why he wants a public inquiry into Peter Mandelson, and particularly the claims that he leaked government documents to Jeffrey Epstein.
I certainly support a police investigation. It looks like crime has been committed, misconduct in public office, which is very serious, it impacts everyone’s lives if someone at the very top of government is betraying our country …
But I think we need to think even more deeply about this. I think the case for a public inquiry into national security, and indeed the British victims of Jeffrey Epstein, has now become a requirement.
This is so serious in the impact it has on how we govern ourselves, as well as, of course, the victims, that I think the case for a public inquiry is now overwhelming.
Davey also said he did not accept that it would be too difficult or time-consuming to pass legislation to strip Mandelson of his peerage. “We should strip Lord Mandelson of his peerage, and we can do that today. It’s a very short bill just to focus on Lord Mandelson,” he said.
In a news release, Davey offered more details about why he thinks a public inquiry is needed. He said:
Epstein was leaked highly market-sensitive information by a minister acting as a mole in Whitehall, leaving our institutions dangerously exposed and posing a grave threat to national security.
A full public inquiry with powers to compel witnesses and access messages and emails is essential. Only complete transparency can restore public trust, deliver justice for victims and prevent this level of corruption from ever happening again.
Davey may be overstating his case. Although there is evidence that Mandelson leaked confidential government information to Epstein relating to economic policy, there is no evidence (yet?) of him doing anything that directly threatened national security.
Mandelson denies being drawn to people like Epstein just because they are rich
Here are some more extracts from Katy Balls’ interview with Peter Mandelson in the Times (mostly conducted early last week, before the latest Jeffrey Epstein revelations). (See 9.13am.)
Mandleson says he was “naive” in his dealings with Epstein. He says:
I don’t know what [Epstein’s] motives were – probably mixed – but he provided guidance to help me navigate out of the world of politics and into the world of commerce and finance.
Perhaps he wanted to be a mentor and I was naive in regarding him as a good-faith actor. There was no reason to shun his advice, but I was too trusting. He was always very free and forthright with his views and always presented them as in my best interests.
Mandelson denies being drawn to people just because they are rich. Asked if he had a lapse of judgment when it came to rich people, he replies:
That is a bit of an occupational hazard for a leading politician or a European commissioner, as I was. I don’t think I am drawn towards rich people so much as rich people have big personalities, a lot of knowledge and a lot of experience to share. I hoover that up, but not because they’re wealthy. It’s because of what they do and what they’ve learnt and the responsibilities they’ve exercised, not the size of their bank accounts.
Asked what did draw him to Epstein, he replies:
He was a classic sociopath. Outwardly, completely charming and engaging. He was very clever.
He also says Epstein gave good dinner parties.
I remember one of the two dinner parties of his I went to. I sat next to someone in charge of brain research at Harvard. I was sitting opposite the founders of Google. At the other end of the table was Bill Gates. I think I also brushed past Noam Chomsky on a later date, but he wasn’t having much to do with me given that he was a Marxist philosopher and I was a Blairite.
(Epstein, of course, is better known for the other kinds of parties he used to host, but there is nothing in the interview about those.)
Mandelson denies not being frank with No 10 about his relations with Epstein prior to being appointed ambassador to the US – claiming that the emails that triggered his sacking were ones even he did not remember.
Downing Street did not know what I had long since forgotten. It was a distant chapter from which I have very little recall and have no access at all to records or a diary,” he says. “I understand being surprised by what they learnt, but quite honestly I too am amazed by some of the conversations I had and areas of my life where I was seeking advice from Epstein.
Mandelson says he accepts that it was a mistake for his husband, Reinaldo, to accept £10,000 from Epstein to do an osteopathy course. “In retrospect, it was clearly a lapse in our collective judgment for Reinaldo to accept this offer. At the time it was not a consequential decision,” he says.
He says there would be no point in his giving evidence to Congress about Epstein.
There is nothing I can tell Congress about Epstein they don’t already know. I had no exposure to the criminal aspects of his life. For so many years the voices of his victims were not heard and now Congress has rightly opened everything up.
He says being sacked as ambassador to the US was “felt like being killed without actually dying”.
Minister denounces Mandelson for interview in which he claims outrage about his Epstein links ‘disproportionate'
Good morning. Keir Starmer tried to assuage public and political outrage about Lord Mandelson yesterday by saying that he would like to see him kicked out of the House of Lords for good, but that is not enough for the many people saying that the government should pass primary legislation to remove his peerage. One of them is Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, who told Radio 4 this morning a “very short bill” could be passed “today”. As Jessica Elgot and Emine Sinmaz report in our overnight story, it may turn out that Mandelson ultimately gets punished by the criminal justice system, because the police are reviewing the evidence to see if it justifies a full inquiry.
Davey is also calling for a public inquiry into Mandelson. Harriet Harman, the former Labour deputy leader, has been saying Mandelson should be kicked off the privy council. I’ll quote more from what they, and others, have been saying about ‘what to do about Mandelson’ shortly.
But the most interesting words about Mandelson around this morning come from the man himself. The Times has published a long interview with the peer and former ambassador conducted by Katy Balls. Balls is based in Washington, but she interviewed him at his home in Wiltshire early last week, for what looks like what was originally planned as a magazine feature. But then she also spoke to him on Sunday night, after the release of another 3m Jeffrey Epstein documents led to fresh revelations about his friendship with Mandelson and after the peer resigned from the Labour party as a consequence.
What is striking about the interview is lack of contrition.
In what seems to be a line from the main, pre-Sunday interview (which focused on the September Epstein revelations that led to his being sacked as ambassador to the US) Mandelson says:
Hiding under a rock would be a disproportionate response to a handful of misguided historical emails, which I deeply regret sending. If it hadn’t been for the emails, I’d still be in Washington. Emails sent all those years ago didn’t change the relationship that I had with this monster.
But Balls also quotes him as saying:
I feel the same about the recent download of Epstein files, none of which indicate wrongdoing or misdemeanour on my part.
This quote seems to come from the Sunday chat, but the article is not clear on this point.
Balls also says that on Sunday, after announcing that he was resigning his Labour membership, Mandelson was still talking about making a future contribution to public life. He said:
I am a New Labour person and always will be, wherever the party situates itself. But I think I want a sea change. I want to be more of an outsider looking in rather than the other way round. I want to contribute ideas that enable Britain to strengthen and to work for all, in every part of the country.
Karin Smyth, the secondary care minister, was on the interview round for the government this morning, and she was asked about the Times article. She said Mandelson still did not seem to understand what he had done wrong. She told the Today programme:
Like, sadly, many other men I’ve seen in similar positions over the years, there is a lack of real reality and understanding about the depth of this now demonstrated in that interview.
I’m not entirely sure what day that interview took place, but each hour is bringing really shocking and quite astonishing levels of email correspondence that is shocking absolutely everybody.
The realisation has to dawn on him about what that means.
I will quote more from the Mandelson interview shortly.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
11.30am: David Lammy, the justice secretary and deputy PM, takes justice questions in the Commons.
Noon: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
After 12.30pm: MPs debate the universal credit (removal of two-child limit) bill.
2pm: Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, and Lee Anderson, the Reform MP, hold a press conference. They are announcing a plan to save pubs.
Late afternoon: Peers debate the children’s wellbeing and schools bill, and are due to vote on an amendment to ban mobile phones from schools.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
