Peter Mandelson could face a police investigation over allegations that he leaked market-sensitive UK government information to Jeffrey Epstein during the height of the global financial crisis.
New material from recently released Epstein files appears to show that Mandelson sent multiple emails to the late US financier containing confidential government information while serving as business secretary under former prime minister Gordon Brown.
The disclosures suggest Mandelson shared sensitive policy discussions and internal government papers linked to financial stability measures, bank regulation and asset sales during a period of extreme economic turmoil.
Prime minister Keir Starmer has ordered an investigation by the cabinet secretary and has called for Mandelson to step down from the House of Lords. Gordon Brown has also requested a formal inquiry into the alleged leaks.
Anger has grown across parliament, with MPs accusing Mandelson of serious misconduct. The SNP and Reform UK have formally referred the matter to the police, alleging misconduct in a public office. Senior Labour figures have also indicated that the scale of the allegations could justify a criminal investigation.
The Metropolitan Police has confirmed it has received multiple reports and is assessing whether the claims meet the threshold for a formal criminal inquiry.
The emails in question appear to originate from the highest levels of government. In one case, a secure address linked to Gordon Brown’s office was copied into correspondence later forwarded to Epstein, raising concerns about the potential exposure of restricted communications.
Among the information allegedly shared were details of a confidential plan involving around £20 billion in government asset sales, discussions on changing policy around bankers’ bonuses, advance notice of a major eurozone bailout package and suggestions involving pressure on the then chancellor over financial regulation.
Former deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman said the allegations had damaged trust in public life and called for Mandelson to be removed from senior political roles, including the House of Lords and the Privy Council.
Former advisers have described the alleged conduct as a serious betrayal, particularly given the pressure and secrecy surrounding crisis-era decision-making. Several said they believed police involvement was necessary to establish accountability.
The disclosures form part of a wider release of Epstein-related material published by the US Department of Justice. Separate documents also suggest financial links between Epstein and accounts connected to Mandelson, as well as payments allegedly made to Mandelson’s partner in 2009.
One email exchange from June 2009 appears to show internal discussion of potential asset sales being forwarded to Epstein before the policy was made public. The government later announced plans to sell surplus property in an effort to raise billions of pounds.
Nick Butler, who authored one of the internal policy emails, has said he is considering reporting the matter to the police, stating that confidential exchanges were based on trust and that any breach could have been intended to enable financial advantage.
Gordon Brown said new information had emerged that justified a wider and more intensive inquiry into the disclosure of government papers during the financial crisis. He said earlier reviews had found no evidence, but that the latest material had changed the position.
Further emails suggest Epstein was given early notice of major financial decisions, including a large eurozone bailout and developments linked to Gordon Brown’s resignation.
The controversy has raised fresh questions for Starmer over his decision to appoint Mandelson as US ambassador and his proximity to senior Labour figures. Mandelson resigned his Labour party membership over the weekend.
Downing Street has contacted House of Lords authorities, urging reforms to disciplinary procedures to allow action to be taken against peers in serious cases. However, officials have acknowledged that current rules make removal from the Lords difficult without new legislation.
Senior government figures have stated that no minister should behave in this way and that false declarations of interest should carry consequences.
There is currently no set timetable for the Cabinet Office review, and it remains unclear whether its findings will be made public. The inquiry may involve reviewing archived documents and interviewing former officials involved at the time.
A government spokesperson said it was for the police to determine whether a criminal investigation should proceed and confirmed that the government would cooperate fully if required.
The Financial Conduct Authority declined to comment. Mandelson has been contacted for a response.