The Prime Minister is tonight facing a direct challenge to his integrity after the long-awaited release of the Mandelson files suggested he was explicitly warned of the reputational risk posed by Lord Mandelson’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein before handing him the keys to the British Embassy in Washington.

The 147 pages of internal government documents, published this afternoon following a bruising battle with Parliament, include a vetting report from December 2024. The papers reveal that senior officials flagged Mandelson’s particularly close relationship with the convicted sex offender, noting specifically that their contact continued well after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. The disclosure appears to undermine Sir Keir Starmer’s previous insistence to the Commons that he was only aware of a historical friendship and had been lied to about its depth and darkness.

Credit: Reuters

Fresh anger has also erupted over the confirmation of a £75,000 taxpayer-funded settlement paid to Lord Mandelson after he was sacked in September 2025. The files show that the former Prince of Darkness initially went on the offensive, demanding a massive £547,201 payout the equivalent of his full salary for the remainder of his four-year term.

Faced with Mandelson’s threat of a messy and public unfair dismissal tribunal, the Treasury eventually signed off on the £75,000 figure to settle the matter with minimal fuss. Opposition MPs have today branded the sum hush money by another name, suggesting the government paid the former ambassador to go quietly and avoid a legal discovery process that could have exposed exactly what the Prime Minister knew and when.

​In a heated exchange in the House of Commons today, Cabinet Minister Darren Jones apologised on behalf of the Prime Minister, admitting the appointment was a mistake but maintained that Mandelson had created a litany of deceit to bypass vetting.

However, the published memos tell a more complicated story. They show that while the National Security Adviser and the head of the Foreign Office harboured deep reservations, the appointment was weirdly rushed through Number 10. Whistleblowers suggest that the Prime Minister’s then-Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney, was tasked with finding a way through the Epstein concerns rather than disqualifying the candidate.

As the Metropolitan Police continue their criminal investigation into allegations that Mandelson leaked market-sensitive documents to Epstein during the 2008 financial crisis, the political pressure on Sir Keir has reached a breaking point. With 64% of voters now telling pollsters they believe the PM had enough information to know the appointment was a bad idea, the Mandelson affair has evolved from a diplomatic embarrassment into a fundamental crisis of judgment for the Labour government.

​Do you believe the Prime Minister was truly misled, or was this a calculated political risk that backfired? Leave your comments below and join the debate.