Police are reviewing reports of alleged misconduct after newly released US Department of Justice emails appear to show Lord Peter Mandelson forwarding sensitive government material to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein while he was business secretary in 2009.
The Metropolitan Police said it had received a number of reports following the document release and subsequent media coverage. Commander Ella Marriott said the submissions “will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation” and that any new, relevant information would be assessed and investigated as appropriate. A government spokesperson said it was for police to decide whether to investigate and that ministers would provide any necessary support.
Several parties have submitted complaints to police: the Scottish National Party and Reform UK reported the peer, while the Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and some Labour MPs have called for a formal inquiry. Downing Street said Sir Keir Starmer believes Lord Mandelson should not be a member of the House of Lords or use his title, but noted there is currently no power to remove a peerage without new legislation. The government has opened an urgent internal inquiry into Mandelson’s contact with Epstein during his ministerial tenure and said it will work with the Lords to modernise disciplinary procedures to permit removal of peers who bring the chamber into disrepute.
Lord Mandelson has been on leave from the Lords since taking up a US ambassadorial role in December 2024; he was dismissed from that post in September after earlier revelations about his relationship with Epstein and resigned his Labour membership in January 2026. Mandelson denies that Epstein made financial payments to him two decades ago but has apologised for maintaining an association with Epstein after his conviction and said he regretted that.
The tranche of emails made public this week contains several allegations, presented here as claimed in the documents and subject to verification:
– Mandelson allegedly advised Epstein in 2009 that the boss of JP Morgan should “mildly threaten” the UK chancellor over a proposed one-off tax on bankers’ bonuses;
– He is said to have given Epstein advance notice of a reported €500bn EU bailout plan;
– Epstein is reported to have made three payments of $25,000 to Mandelson in 2003–04, totalling $75,000; and
– Epstein is said to have sent £10,000 to Mandelson’s partner, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, in 2009.
The released emails reportedly show Mandelson forwarded an internal note from Brown adviser Nick Butler—about “releasing value from the very substantial asset base which the government holds” and an “asset sales plan”—to Epstein with the line: “Interesting note that’s gone to the PM.” Epstein allegedly replied asking “what salable [sic] assets?” Another chain shows Epstein asking whether Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan should call then-chancellor Alistair Darling; Mandelson appears to have replied “Yes and mildly threaten.” A separate August 2009 government email about supporting struggling companies in exchange for ownership stakes—originally from Business Minister Shriti Vadera—was also circulated to Epstein, though it is unclear who forwarded that message.
Former prime minister Gordon Brown said he had asked the cabinet secretary to investigate disclosures of confidential and market-sensitive information from the business department during the financial crisis and to widen enquiries into communications between Mandelson and Epstein. Nick Butler, the author of the asset email, said he was “shocked” and that Mandelson “should be ashamed of what he’s done.” Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister Darren Jones told MPs the “undeclared exchange of funds, the passing on of government information, let alone the facts that those exchanges were to a convicted paedophile, are wholly unconscionable.”
Conservative shadow minister Alex Burghart said the government could not avoid responsibility for appointing Mandelson as an ambassador given his known links to Epstein. Some Labour MPs have privately criticised the government’s handling of the matter, arguing it should have acted more forcefully.
The Metropolitan Police and other relevant authorities will assess the material to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to open criminal investigations.