‘Peter Mandelson has a lot of explaining to do – what we’ve heard so far doesn’t cut it’
Peter Mandelson has resigned from the Labour Party and faces the loss of his peerage after new details of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein emerged. Is it finally game over for one of the architects of Tony Blair’s New Labour?
Listen to this article
Read time: 4 mins
In brief…
- The latest release of documents from the Epstein Files has revealed new details of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with the convicted sex offender, which included sharing confidential documents relating to UK banking and business.
- The News Agents say any hopes of Mandelson returning to public life are now “in tatters”.
- They say that the focus of the story must remain on the victims of Epstein and his depraved associates, who trafficked and raped women and girls.
What’s the story?
Peter Mandelson cannot remember alleged payments of tens of thousands of pounds made to him by Jeffrey Epstein.
New documents reveal that Mandelson was allegedly given $75,000 by the convicted pedophile and sex trafficker, while his partner was given an additional $10,000.
They also show he was sharing details and leaking documents relating to the UK banking industry and asset sales.
"Allegations which I believe to be false that he made financial payments to me 20 years ago, and of which I have no record or recollection, need investigating by me," said Mandelson in a statement on the claims, as he resigned from the Labour Party.
This, he says, is to avoid causing "further embarrassment" to the party. For now, he remains a member of the House of Lords.
"Mandelson seems to be still in complete denial about both his sacking as UK ambassador to Washington, and in denial at what this latest tranche of emails appear to show," says Emily Maitlis.
"The fact that all this was coming from somebody at the heart of Downing Street is worse than lobbying.
"It's worse than just being a friend of a dodgy guy.”
Jon Sopel says Mandelson must be "reappraising everything" after the recent release from the Epstein files.
“Peter Mandelson has a lot of explaining to do – what we’ve heard so far doesn’t cut it,” he says.
"He wanted a rehabilitation into public life, but must now realise that any hopes of this are in absolute tatters right now, given what we have learned, and given the questions that remain unanswered."
How big a deal is this to the Labour government?
Mandelson rose to prominence during the era of Tony Blair and New Labour, but his association with Epstein (although not the full extent) was well known when he was appointed the UK's ambassador to the US in February 2025.
Keir Starmer has said that Mandelson should be stripped of his House of Lords peerage.
Jon Sopel says there are parallels between the stripping of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s titles and the potential loss of Mandelson’s peerage – but the differences are stark.
"The king didn't have any option of appointing Prince Andrew. Prince Andrew, he was born and gets the title Prince Andrew," Jon says.
"Keir Starmer had a choice in appointing Peter Mandelson as our ambassador to Washington."
He says that key to pushing through this appointment was Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, who remains in the role.
"There are some pretty serious questions for Keir Starmer and Morgan McSweeney to answer," Jon adds.
"Why didn't they let the vetting process go through its full kind of course, before reappointing Peter Mandelson, given everything we have learned since then."
'The focus must be on the victims'
Emily says the conversation has already moved on from reputations or rehabilitations, given the severity of the new allegations in the documents.
"We are so far beyond titles at this point," she says.
"Why are some people talking about whether there'll be a rehabilitation of Mandelson's political career?"
She says the focus of the conversation must remain on the victims, the women, and the fact that other than Ghislaine Maxwell, no one has ever served any jail time for the crimes committed by Epstein and his billionaire associates.
"It does seem to me that the urgency now is to get anyone – and I'm not saying they are guilty, let's just hear what they know – before Congress to testify so we understand what they can actually tell us," she adds.
Will anyone testify against Epstein and his associates?
Jon says it would be "shameful" if either Mandelson or Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, at this point, rejected any calls to testify in any future criminal case relating to Epstein.
New images of Prince Andrew, on all-fours looming over a girl or woman lying on the floor inside a property owned by Epstein, were also made public in the recent release.
"There are victims of all of this," he says.
"There is so little accountability for all the things that have happened. "They owe it to the victims to go before Congress and say on oath what they know, what they were aware of, what happened and why."