It’s been a tumultuous week in British politics, as calls for the dismissal of Lord Peter Mandelson from his post as the UK’s ambassador to the United States have reached a fever pitch. At the heart of the controversy: a trove of leaked emails and letters revealing the depth of Mandelson’s relationship with the late convicted paedophile and financier Jeffrey Epstein. The revelations have triggered outrage across party lines, raised questions about government vetting processes, and left Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer grappling with mounting pressure from both Parliament and the public.
The storm broke after documents released by US lawmakers included a 2003 birthday note from Lord Mandelson to Epstein, in which he called the disgraced financier his “best pal.” According to reporting from The Sun and Bloomberg, the correspondence didn’t end there. Even as Epstein faced jail for soliciting prostitution from a minor in June 2008, Mandelson reportedly sent supportive messages, telling Epstein to “fight for early release” and confiding, “I think the world of you.”
Home Office minister Mike Tapp minced no words when asked about the matter. Speaking to LBC Radio and the BBC, Tapp described the emails as “really disturbing and sickening,” admitting, “I find it disturbing, those sorts of emails in honesty… we have to just look at what Peter Mandelson is saying around his regret and what he knew at the time.” Tapp emphasized the importance of integrity in public service, noting, “If the Prime Minister’s saying that they’ve been through the process, then that’s the situation we’re in now.”
But for many in Westminster, that explanation falls short. The Conservative Party has tabled a series of parliamentary questions, demanding to know what Mandelson disclosed about his Epstein ties during the vetting process for his high-profile diplomatic role. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch was blunt in her assessment, labeling the revelations “sickening” and Mandelson’s position “untenable.” In a post on X, Badenoch declared, “Peter Mandelson needs to be fired now.” She also questioned Sir Keir’s judgment for hand-picking Mandelson over a career diplomat, calling it “bad judgement.”
The backlash hasn’t been limited to the opposition benches. Labour backbenchers Richard Burgon and Nadia Whittome have both called for Mandelson’s resignation. Whittome was especially forthright, stating, “We either stand with victims or we don’t.” Bell Ribeiro-Addy became the first Labour MP to publicly urge Mandelson to step down, telling the i Paper that the revelations were “going to disturb quite a few people.” Labour MPs Andy McDonald, Kim Johnson, and Bell Ribeiro-Addy have echoed these calls, while the SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn warned the prime minister that his “reputation is now on the line.”
Despite the growing chorus, Sir Keir Starmer has stood by his ambassador. At Prime Minister’s Questions on September 10, Starmer said he retained “confidence” in Mandelson and insisted that “due process was followed” during the appointment. He reiterated that Mandelson had “repeatedly expressed his deep regret” for his association with Epstein, who was found dead in a Manhattan jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges—a death ruled a suicide.
Mandelson himself has issued public apologies. In an interview with Harry Cole Saves the West, he admitted, “I regret very, very deeply indeed carrying on [my association with Epstein] for far longer than I should have done.” He further explained to the BBC, “I relied on assurances of his innocence that turned out later to be horrendously false.” Mandelson claimed he was misled by Epstein’s lawyers, saying, “His lawyers claimed that it was a shake down of him, a criminal conspiracy. I foolishly relied on their word which I regret to this day.” He also described the words used in his birthday message as “very embarrassing to see and read,” adding that he felt “a tremendous sense of regret” and “a tremendous sense of sympathy” for Epstein’s victims. When pressed about whether he had continued a business or personal relationship with Epstein after the latter was charged, Mandelson responded, “It was not a business relationship.” He insisted he “never saw the wrongdoing” or “evidence of criminal activity.”
The controversy has also highlighted gaps in parliamentary oversight. As a member of the House of Lords, Mandelson cannot be compelled to appear before Members of Parliament. The Foreign Affairs Select Committee requested to question him after his ambassadorial appointment last year, but the Foreign Office reportedly blocked the request. Conservative MP Aphra Brandreth is the only committee member to publicly call for Mandelson to give evidence, while former committee chair Alicia Kearns has pressed the current chair, Dame Emily Thornberry, to summon Mandelson and seek clarity about his relationship with Epstein. Home Office minister Mike Tapp told Sky News, “It is important we have full answers on this.”
The lack of transparency has drawn further criticism. The Liberal Democrats have called for an official investigation into what Mandelson disclosed during his vetting. Meanwhile, Sky News reports that the Foreign Office’s lead civil servant, Ollie Robbins, has written to Mandelson with pointed questions, including when he last met Epstein, when he last accepted hospitality, and what their last business dealings involved. It remains unclear whether Mandelson will respond.
Despite the uproar in the UK, the reaction in Washington has been more muted. According to the BBC, Mandelson recently spent almost an hour with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, with Trump reportedly telling the ambassador he was “doing a fantastic job.” A diplomatic source told Sky News that the US administration is “not the least bit fussed about this,” given their own domestic distractions, including ongoing scrutiny of Trump and other prominent Americans linked to Epstein. “This isn’t going to be a big story in the States as the focus is on Trump and dozens of other prominent American figures,” the source said. “The US press have lots of other fish to chase.”
For now, Mandelson’s future as ambassador remains uncertain. While Downing Street values his ability to work with the Trump administration, the ongoing revelations and persistent questions about his judgment threaten to overshadow his diplomatic mission. As more details continue to emerge—and with both Parliament and the public demanding answers—the government faces a test of transparency, accountability, and trust.
In the end, the Mandelson-Epstein saga has become a case study in the challenges of political appointments, the limits of oversight, and the enduring power of public scrutiny.
