-
The crimes of Jeffrey Epstein were truly terrible. The latest set of releases from the US Department of Justice show a relationship built on affection, money transfers from Epstein to Mandelson’s family, and information transfer from Mandelson to Epstein. We welcome the belated announcement of an investigation into Mandelson’s conduct but this should have happened long ago. There needs to be an investigation into his behaviour while he was our ambassador in Washington. The Government must now be honest about what they knew when making the appointment.
-
The files show that Peter Mandelson received £50,000 from a notorious paedophile and later shared market-sensitive information with Epstein. These actions are unacceptable and should be investigated further by the police.
-
We must remember the many women and young girls who experienced unimaginable horrors at the hands of Epstein and his network. It is important to focus on their justice and ensure that those involved are held accountable.
-
The key question is who advised the Prime Minister on Peter Mandelson's appointment. Will my right hon. Friend give us a guarantee that those around the Prime Minister will be fully investigated?
-
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is right to say that the other place must modernise its disciplinary procedures, but this kicks the Mandelson can down the road. There needs to be legislation to remove Mandelson’s peerage.
-
What is being done to ensure that victims of sexual violence will be heard by those in power, including the Prime Minister?
-
This House would be minded to bring forward legislation quickly. How can such an error occur within government? Can the Minister assure full engagement with criminal authorities and a full inquiry?
-
Why are the Government conducting an inquiry without informing the Met police, if they are not proactively calling in the police?
-
The passing on of highly sensitive information by a serving Cabinet Minister to third parties is hugely troubling. Could the Chief Secretary confirm whether anyone has discussed similar nature information since in recent times?
-
It might be time for criminal proceedings to take place, especially when tackling violence against women and girls is a priority. The Government should encourage everyone mentioned in the files to co-operate with American authorities.
-
The Government do not have the power to remove peerages, but it is absolutely right to modernise procedures to allow for the removal of peers when they bring the House into disrepute.
-
Why isn't the Minister acting more proactively and decisively on this issue, given the known relationship between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein?
-
The public is questioning how Peter Mandelson was appointed ambassador despite known issues with Jeffrey Epstein. He calls for an inquiry into the appointment process and security checks, urging the Chief Secretary to ensure that those involved had proper clearance.
-
All due process was followed in the appointment of Peter Mandelson. New measures for political appointments are being put in place. The Government is committed to working with relevant authorities to update procedures regarding peerages and ensuring accountability for members who bring the House into disrepute.
-
He questions why Labour leaders repeatedly appoint Peter Mandelson despite his history of corruption and resignations. He calls for legislation to strip Mandelson of his peerage quickly, reflecting on the national interest as well.
-
Mandelson's actions fell below expected standards, yet he was allowed to quietly resign despite being sacked as ambassador. He urges expedited legislation to remove all privileges from Mandelson and ensure justice for victims.
-
She focuses on the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, demanding that any UK-linked offences be fully investigated, ensuring that evidence is acted upon, and that anyone implicated faces full legal consequences.
-
McIntyre expresses disgust over Mandelson's appointment despite known issues. He calls for the Government to act swiftly to remove Mandelson from the House of Lords and improve direct appointments processes.
-
He criticises the Prime Minister’s decision to appoint Peter Mandelson, highlighting that he leaked confidential information to a convicted sex offender and accepted backhanders. He questions the Government's intentions regarding primary legislation and proactive investigation.
-
She agrees with reviewing Mandelson’s actions during his time as a Minister, particularly concerning potential illegal disclosure of government information during the financial crisis.
-
McVey demands that the Government bring forward primary legislation to strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage without delay. She questions the fairness and consistency of the process if other peers face similar scrutiny.
-
He supports the decision for an investigation into the revelations but calls for assurance that the Cabinet Secretary will have everything needed to expedite his findings and ensure public trust.
-
Taylor highlights the horrific nature of the files released regarding relationships among the powerful, including Mandelson's emails with Epstein. He calls for proactive police investigations into unredacted documents and a republishing of Mandelson’s interests from 1992 to 2010.
-
Peter Mandelson’s involvement with Jeffrey Epstein strengthens the case for a Hillsborough law that holds Ministers accountable and imposes up to 10 years’ imprisonment for misuse of office.
-
Labour appointee Lord Mandelson has been a pivotal figure in the Prime Minister’s leadership project, and this is now a damage limitation exercise. The Government's failure to clear up their own mess undermines public confidence in accountability of democratic institutions.
-
The swift passage of legislation holding Ministers accountable for improper conduct is crucial to maintaining public trust, especially concerning victims of sexual abuse and violence.
-
There are multiple recent Labour appointees connected to convicted paedophiles. The police should be called immediately rather than the matter being referred to the Cabinet Secretary alone, given potential misconduct in public office and risks of evidence destruction.
-
Mandelson’s actions suggest political insider trading on a grand scale. An independent inquiry and criminal investigation are necessary to address the breach of trust and rules in leaking sensitive market information.
-
It is unacceptable that Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador was not reconsidered given his links with Epstein. Questions about severance payments, contract details, non-disclosure agreements, and salary cessation remain unanswered for almost two months.
-
Government must ensure the voices of victims and survivors of sexual abuse are heard by those in power, including in relation to Epstein’s victims.
-
There has been undue delay in investigating Mandelson's relationship with Epstein. The Prime Minister's commitment to upholding standards is questioned given the lack of immediate investigation into his appointment despite known links.
-
Representation of outside bodies by Ministers, particularly in this case with a vile paedophile like Epstein, is disgraceful and underscores the need for strengthened ministerial codes to prevent such occurrences.
-
The Government should bring forward legislation to remove Peter Mandelson from the House of Lords. The public will be alarmed by the delay in taking such actions.
-
Peter Mandelson's revelations warrant his expulsion from the House of Lords. Labour has promised major Lords reform for over 100 years but consistently delays action, suggesting it is time to abolish the House of Lords.
-
The Prime Minister's judgment was flawed in appointing Peter Mandelson despite his baggage. The appointer must own decisions made outside civil service ranks.
-
Supports proposals to remove Mandelson without delay, but calls for a full investigation into all those linked to him in the Epstein scandal.
-
Calls for due diligence and inquiries to be done following Mandelson's sacking, suggesting that political figures failed to conduct proper checks on his background.
-
Hopes no party will cover up less fragrant Members of the House of Lords. Mandelson's actions reveal a lack of transparency from the Prime Minister.
-
Questions the nature of Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, demanding that the Prime Minister provide more details on advice he received regarding Mandelson's conduct.
-
Calls for investigation into whether Mandelson lobbied against British Government policy while serving as ambassador to the United States, questioning integrity of government appointments.
-
Asks for assurance that any British victims revealed in latest releases will receive support and help through what could be a traumatic experience.