LONDON — The U.K government has published the first tranche of its long-awaited files relating to the appointment of former U.S. ambassador Peter Mandelson following the revelations about his association with the financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Mandelson was sacked as Britain’s top Washington diplomat in September last year, with further revelations prompting a police investigation into his conduct which led to his arrest last month. He has not been charged, and his lawyers have said he is cooperating with the investigation and his overriding priority is to clear his name. He has previously apologized “unequivocally” for his association with Epstein and “to the women and girls that suffered.”
The files shed new light on how Mandelson was appointed to the role. POLITICO last month revealed serious concerns from current and former security officials about the process which appointed him.
Here is what POLITICO has found in the files — so far.
Starmer warned of ‘reputational risks’ of Mandelson’s Epstein relationship
Keir Starmer was warned about the reputational risk of Peter Mandelson’s “close relationship” with Jeffrey Epstein in a 2019 report compiled by multinational bank JP Morgan.
Ahead of appointing Mandelson to be Britain’s ambassador to the U.S. in December 2024, The British PM was warned of the “reputational risks” from the former British business minister and Labour politician’s long-time relationship with the disgraced financier.
The key findings of the report were shared in a due diligence checklist with Starmer on Dec. 11, days before he appointed Mandelson to the top diplomatic post on Dec. 20.
The 2019 report commissioned by JPMorgan found Epstein appeared to “maintain a particularly close relationship with Prince Andrew the Duke of York and Lord Peter Mandelson, a senior member of the British government.”
The key findings of the report were shared in a due diligence checklist with Starmer.
Mandelson wanted a payout of more than £500K when he was sacked
Mandelson asked for a severance payment of more than £500,000 when he was sacked as Britain’s ambassador to Washington last September — he got £75,000.
Internal Foreign Office emails show the ex-ambassador got £40,330 “in lieu of three months’ notice” — and a special severance payment of £34,670.
He asked for a payout of the remainder of his full salary — £161,318 a year over the four-year term — which “would have amounted to £547,201.”
Top Foreign Office official Olly Robbins described the final payout as “good value for money” in a message to Chief Secretary to the Treasury James Murray in October.
PM’s comms chief was ‘satisfied’ over Epstein links
The U.K. prime minister’s former Director of Communications Matthew Doyle was said to be “satisfied” with Peter Mandelson’s responses when questioned about his contact with Jeffrey Epstein, the documents suggest.
In a note sent to the prime minister on Dec. 11 2024, which included a copy of the due diligence review into Mandelson’s background, Starmer was told his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney had also “discussed Peter’s relationship with Jeffery [sic] Epstein.”
The note added: “But your Director of Communications is satisfied with his responses to questions about contact.”
Downing Street asked for daily ‘welfare check’ on Mandelson
A No. 10 official appears to have requested a daily “welfare check” on Mandelson.
The request came as Starmer prepared to give in to opposition demands to release files relating to his appointment, and time as ambassador to Washington.
“It would also be great to know that there has been a welfare check and to do one each day if that’s OK for a while,” said an email from Ailsa Terry, a No.10 private secretary for foreign affairs, to an official working in human resources.
That email was sent on Feb. 4, shortly after the government promised to release the texts, emails and documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador.
Jonathan Powell says he raised the alarm over the ‘unusual’ appointment process
Starmer’s National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell claimed to have raised concerns about Mandelson directly with Starmer’s ex-chief of staff McSweeney — but was told they had been addressed.
A freshly published document appears to show details of a fact-finding call between Starmer’s General Counsel Mike Ostheimer and Powell about the appointment process which took place the day after Mandelson’s sacking.
A summary of the discussion says that Powell, a veteran government adviser, found the process “unusual” and “weird rushed.”
According to the document, Powell disclosed that he had raised concerns directly with the prime minister’s then-chief of staff McSweeney about the “individual and reputation,” but was told those issues had been “addressed.”
Ex-Tory Chancellor George Osborne was in the running
Due diligence checks on an “alternative political candidate” for U.K. ambassador to Washington appear to have been sought before the decision was taken to appoint Mandelson.
A U.K. government official, granted anonymity to speak frankly, confirmed to POLITICO that “alternative candidate” was George Osborne, the former Conservative chancellor.
The “alternative” candidate is mentioned in a box note sent by Nin Pandit, Starmer’s then principal private secretary, to the PM on Dec. 11, 2024 — nine days before Mandelson was announced as the government’s pick.
It suggests Osborne — once a political enemy of Starmer’s Labour Party — was seriously considered for the role that eventually went to Mandelson.
This is a developing story and will be updated.
Here is what the Mandelson Files reveal — so far
Source: Viral Showbiz Pinay
0 Comments