Good morning. Older readers may remember Peter Mandelson as a man in a sharp suit drifting through New Labour’s 1990s heyday like a Bond villain with a Filofax. An architect of Labour’s modernisation and a lightning rod for right-wing press ire, he has been in the orbit of power for more than three decades.
That run has now come to a shuddering halt after the release of the so-called Epstein files by the US Department of Justice, which detail the extent of Mandelson’s contact with the late billionaire financier and convicted child sexual abuser Jeffrey Epstein. While the Met police investigate Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office, the disclosures from the files have also raised urgent questions about judgment, access and accountability at the highest levels of public life.
For today’s newsletter I take a look at Mandelson’s history and current situation, and speak to investigations correspondent Henry Dyer to unpack why, even in these extreme circumstances, Mandelson cannot simply be removed from the House of Lords. First, the headlines.
Five big stories
-
UK politics | Labour MPs have warned that Keir Starmer’s days as prime minister are numbered after a day of fury over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador despite his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.
-
Gaza | Israeli forces have bulldozed part of a Gaza cemetery containing the war graves of dozens of British, Australian and other allied soldiers killed in the first and second world wars.
-
Crime | An 18-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of murder after a student in his 20s was stabbed in Leicester city centre and later died in hospital, Leicestershire police have said.
-
Media | Washington Post editor in chief Matt Murray on Wednesday morning announced internally a “broad strategic reset” that will result in “significant” layoffs across the company.
-
Immigration | Donald Trump’s border tsar said about 700 federal agents would leave Minnesota, a large drop in agents on the ground but still leaving about 2,000 agents there, far above typical levels for the state.
In depth: ‘Peers are expected to act on their personal honour, the ‘good chap’ theory’
Henry Dyer is no stranger to Lords behaving badly, having been part of the Guardian team whose investigations into Lord Evans of Watford and Lord Dannatt led to them being suspended from the House of Lords. I wanted to know if a similar fate might befall Lord Mandelson who, despite saying he has effectively retired, will retain his title.
“Peers are expected to act on their personal honour, the code of conduct says,” Henry tells me. “That’s never really been properly defined – the whole thing is supposed to work on the ‘good chap’ theory.”
But recent publicity very much suggests that Mandelson has not been a ‘good chap’.
Who is Peter Mandelson – and why does he still matter?
Peter Mandelson is one of the most influential political operators of the past 40 years, even though he has spent much of that time just outside the spotlight. A central architect of New Labour, he helped modernise the party’s image in the 1990s, earning him the nickname “the Prince of Darkness” for his command of media messaging.
He served in multiple cabinet roles under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, twice resigning amid controversy and twice returning, before reinventing himself as a European Commissioner, lobbyist and political fixer. Elevated to the House of Lords in 2008, Mandelson remained a behind-the-scenes force within Labour, advising Keir Starmer’s leadership and briefly serving as UK ambassador to Washington in 2025, before the swirl of Epstein-related stories led him to step down.
Mandelson was also an exceptional figure in politics for being openly gay, a fact that has shaped how he is treated by the media and the opposition alike. Long before culture wars were part of everyday Westminster talk, his sexuality was weaponised against him. Columnist Matthew Parris “outed” Mandelson in 1998 during an interview for BBC Two’s Newsnight, and Boris Johnson referred to “tank-topped bum boys” in a Telegraph column – an explicitly homophobic attack Mandelson later called an outright slur.
What makes him matter now, though, is not just his longevity, but his proximity to power: a figure who was never merely a minister, but a strategist, gatekeeper and power broker.
What is Mandelson being investigated for?
The Metropolitan police are investigating Peter Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office, a common-law offence that applies when a public official is alleged to have acted in their position in a way that seriously abuses the public’s trust. The inquiry was launched after the release of documents from the Epstein files appeared to show Mandelson sharing confidential and potentially market-sensitive government information with Jeffrey Epstein while serving as business secretary during the global financial crisis.
Misconduct in public office is a notoriously broad and ill-defined offence, but it carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. In practice, prosecutions are rare and typically focus on whether a public official wilfully misused their position without reasonable justification. Other potential lines of inquiry include market abuse, if confidential information was disclosed in a way that could have influenced trading in government bonds or financial markets.
Mandelson has denied wrongdoing, saying the documents do not show any misdemeanour on his part. The police investigation is expected to involve interviews, examination of devices and requests for unredacted material from US authorities, with any decision to bring charges ultimately resting with prosecutors.
What is the Official Secrets Act – and has Mandelson broken it?
Breaking the Official Secrets Act is often invoked as shorthand for the gravest imaginable breach of state trust, but in practice the act is a blunt, ageing and rarely used legal tool. While senior politicians have suggested Mandelson’s email exchanges with Epstein may have breached the act, it is far from clear whether the information allegedly shared falls within the narrow categories the act protects.
The core of the legislation dates back to 1911, drafted in the shadow of fears about a German invasion and written in the language of war, enemies and spies rather than modern government, markets or email trails. Because of that, prosecutions under the act are exceptionally rare – typically fewer than one a year. Former intelligence officials describe it as “notoriously flaky”, and prosecutors are cautious about using it unless a case is overwhelming.
Espionage trials are also politically sensitive – juries have historically proved unpredictable, and failed cases can cause deep embarrassment to the state. Two of the most famous Official Secrets cases – against Clive Ponting over the Falklands, and Katharine Gun over the Iraq war – ended in acquittal.
Why wasn’t Mandelson ejected from the House of Lords?
In theory, the House of Lords does have a disciplinary system, Henry explains. Complaints about peers are investigated by the Lords commissioner for standards, who can deal with minor breaches directly or refer more serious cases to the Conduct Committee, a body made up of peers and independent lay members. It can decide, Henry says, “that a Peer might have to pay some money back, might have to issue an apology, and it can suspend peers.”
What it has almost never done is expel a peer outright. While the committee technically has that power, it has never formally removed someone who did not resign first. The closest case was Lord Ahmed in 2020, who stepped down after being told he would be expelled after findings of serious misconduct. He was jailed in 2022 for sexual offences against children.
There are also time limits, Henry says. Ordinarily, the Lords will only investigate breaches of its code of conduct committed within the past four years, though the committee can choose to waive that restriction in exceptional circumstances. In Mandelson’s case, Henry points out, alleged conduct dating back to his time as a cabinet minister in 2009 could plausibly have been investigated as behaviour that brought the House into disrepute – had he not already resigned.
Crucially, though, resignation from the Lords does not mean the loss of a title. Mandelson has retired under the House of Lords Reform Act 2014, but he remains Lord Mandelson for life. That distinction lies at the heart of the current controversy.
What sanctions might Mandelson ultimately face?
With the police now investigating, Henry says any disciplinary process inside parliament would almost certainly be paused. He points to the case of Michelle Mone, who has been under investigation by the Lords commissioner for standards for several years while criminal inquiries continue. Acting before the conclusion of a police investigation risks accusations of pre-judgment.
In theory, parliament could legislate to strip Mandelson of his peerage altogether. Life peerages are created under statute, and Henry stresses that what parliament creates by law, it can undo by law. There is even a legislative template: the Titles Deprivation Act 1917, passed during the first world war, removed titles from peers who sided with enemy powers, and included the precise wording needed to strike someone from the roll of peerages.
Legally, then, it could be done quickly – even in a single day – if the government chose to make time for it. The obstacle is political rather than procedural. Targeting a single individual risks setting an uncomfortable precedent, raising questions about why one peer is singled out and others are not, and edging towards the historical taboo of parliament and the crown using acts of attainder to punish individuals with bespoke legislation.
Henry’s conclusion is blunt: if ministers truly wanted to act, they could. The real issue is whether they are prepared to own the precedent – and whether they want to wait for the outcome of criminal investigations before doing so.
What else we’ve been reading
-
Lanre Bakare sets out on a quest to learn to style his daughters’ mixed-race hair. The results are both moving and sweet. Aamna Mohdin, newsletters team
-
The reaction to the killing of Alex Pretti has been heartening, with even the gun lobby questioning the Trump administration’s justification. Abené Clayton contrasts that with the lack of attention given to the death by police of Black gun owner Philando Castile. Toby Moses, head of newsletters
-
Aditya Chakrabortty’s fascinating reporting on the Greens show they have moved beyond an electoral force to become a social movement, with serious implications for the leadership within the Greens and Labour. Aamna
-
Austin Applebee’s story has been a rare ray of light in 2026; our explainer looks at how a 13-year-old boy swam for four hours, through treacherous maritime conditions, then ran 2km to save his family stuck at sea. Toby
-
A growing number of people are choosing to limit the contact they have with their family. Emily Retter tenderly explores the benefits and the negatives of such a decision. Aamna
Sport
Winter Olympics | Great Britain’s best hopes of a gold medal at the Winter Olympics have suffered a significant blow after skeleton’s governing body banned Team GB’s aerodynamic helmets for being the wrong shape.
Rugby union | ITV will screen in-game commercials for the first time during Thursday’s Six Nations Championship opener between France and Ireland at Stade de France.
Snooker | The much-loved snooker player and commentator John Virgo has died at the age of 79, World Snooker has announced.
The front pages
“‘It’s over’ for Starmer, say Labour MPs amid fury over Mandelson” is the Guardian splash. The Times leads on “Starmer fights for future over Mandelson scandal”, the Telegraph has “Rayner turns on Starmer” and the Sun simply says “Revolting”. “Starmer in grave peril as Rayner twists knife” is lead story at the Mail, and the i paper frames news of the day as “Starmer isolated: Labour MPs losing confidence in the Prime Minister”. The FT splashes on “Satellite signals intercepted by Kremlin craft, spy officials say” while the Mirror mourns the death of snooker legend John Virgo with “I can’t imagine a life without my John”.
Today in Focus
A survivor on the Epstein Files
The latest release of the Epstein files has dominated the news this week. Annie Kelly speaks to Lisa Philips, who suffered years of abuse by Epstein in the 2000s and is now one of the many survivors calling for more transparency from the Trump administration.
Cartoon of the day | Nicola Jennings
The Upside
A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad
The Welsh county of Carmarthenshire has launched “The Sisterhood,” a new initiative capitalising on the trend of women foregoing traditional prosecco-fuelled getaways for trips centred on wellbeing and acquiring new skills.
The goal is to immerse visitors in the local landscape and its seasons, while aiming to embody the Welsh word for sisterhood, chwaeroliaeth, which means “sisters together”. It reflects a Welsh tradition of women gathering, often while performing shared tasks like milking or churning butter.
Groups can opt for pre-curated stays, or they can design a bespoke experience. The activities are led by Wild Kin, a collective of local experts including potters, painters, coastal foragers, horse whisperers, walking guides, makers, and massage therapists.
Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday
Bored at work?
And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.
