The political fallout from Peter Mandelson’s abrupt removal as UK ambassador to the US continues to ripple through Westminster.
Critics are now pressing Sir Keir Starmer to clarify whether taxpayers’ money was used to provide the disgraced peer with a substantial severance payment following his dismissal over links to Jeffrey Epstein.
Sir Keir, who personally appointed Mandelson to the Washington post, is facing renewed scrutiny after fresh US documents shed light on the nature of his past connections.
Pressure is mounting for the Prime Minister to explain if a “huge payoff” was handed to Mandelson after he was forced to step down.
The Epstein Files Spark Fresh Scrutiny
Lord Mandelson’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein, highlighted in newly released US Department of Justice files, have intensified calls for transparency.
Some documents reportedly suggest Mandelson passed sensitive information to Epstein while serving in Gordon Brown’s government—a revelation that triggered his removal from the ambassador role, which was reportedly worth around £160,000 per year.
Downing Street confirmed that the Cabinet Office referred material from the so-called ‘Epstein files’ to the police after an initial review raised concerns that official handling safeguards may have been “compromised.”
Government sources have also hinted that Mandelson may have misled officials about his past ties to Epstein when he was vetted for the ambassadorial post.
No Comment on Severance Terms
Despite the growing public interest, No. 10 has refused to comment on the financial terms of Mandelson’s departure.
When asked whether the government intends to reclaim any taxpayer-funded payout, the Prime Minister’s official spokesperson responded:
“I’m not going to get into HR matters.
More broadly, anything of that nature would be set out in annual accounts in line with usual processes.”
Suggested Readings (News continues below)
If Mandelson did secure a significant compensation package, he would join a long line of senior officials who have received payouts after leaving government posts.
Recent examples include Sir Tom Scholar, who received £335,000 after being sacked as Treasury top official, and Jonathan Slater, who left the Department for Education in 2021 with a £277,780 payout following the A-Level algorithm controversy.
MPs Demand Transparency
Senior Conservative MP Alicia Kearns has voiced frustration over the lack of clarity.
Despite contacting Cabinet Secretary Sir Chris Wormald in December, she has received no answers regarding Mandelson’s possible severance.
During a House of Commons session, Kearns questioned Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister Darren Jones:
“Did Mandelson receive a taxpayer-funded severance payment after stepping down as ambassador?
If so, how much? Will details of his contract be published?
Was any non-disclosure agreement signed, and when did his salary formally cease?”
Jones promised to relay her concerns and ensure the questions are addressed, but the delay has fueled further unease among MPs.
Mandelson Speaks Out
In a recent interview with The Times, Mandelson likened his sacking to a “5.30am drive-by shooting,” describing how he and his husband were told to leave the ambassador’s residence within a week.
“It felt like being killed without actually dying,” he said, before emphasizing that he has no intention of disappearing from public life.
He defended himself against accusations linked to historical emails and the newly released Epstein files:
“Hiding under a rock would be a disproportionate response to a handful of misguided historical emails, which I deeply regret sending.
Emails sent all those years ago didn’t change the relationship that I had with this monster.
None of the recent download of Epstein files indicate wrongdoing on my part.”
Officials Maintain Confidentiality
The Foreign Office has consistently declined to confirm whether Mandelson received a payoff.
Sir Oliver Robbins, the top civil servant at the department, told MPs last November:
“The way in which we deal with individual employees’ termination under their contract must remain confidential… It was done absolutely in accordance with his written contract.
Any implications of his termination will be reported in our annual report and accounts.”
With questions about taxpayer money and transparency continuing to mount, the political pressure on Sir Keir and Mandelson shows no signs of easing.
