LONDON: Newly released UK government files have revealed that Prime Minister Keir Starmer was warned about potential reputational risks related to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the United States. The concerns stemmed from Mandelson’s past associations with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Read More: As European heads roll from Epstein links, US fallout muted
A due diligence report prepared in December 2024, ahead of Mandelson’s Washington appointment, flagged a “general reputational risk” linked to his ongoing contact with Epstein. According to the report, Mandelson maintained communications with Epstein after the latter’s 2008 conviction for procuring an underage girl.
Starmer was warned of ‘reputational risk’ in appointing Mandelson due to Epstein links, files show https://t.co/l1adiRIAXC
— The Globe and Mail (@globeandmail) March 11, 2026
🚨 NEW
New files released about Mandleson reveal that Keir Starmer was TOLD that he was a General risk because of his links to known Sex Offender, Jeffrey Epstein.
What are your thoughts on this? pic.twitter.com/x3UrY1seTz
— StraightTalkUK (@AskBritain_) March 11, 2026
The documents further note that Mandelson reportedly stayed at Epstein’s residence while Epstein was jailed in June 2009. The relationship spanned the period when Mandelson was serving as business minister and continued even after the end of the Labour government in 2010.
The due diligence assessment, provided to Starmer in November 2024, referenced a series of media reports highlighting Mandelson’s links to Epstein and cautioned that the association could have negative implications for the UK’s diplomatic credibility.
Separate released documents shed light on Mandelson’s previous role prior to his ambassadorial appointment. They detail discussions surrounding his departure from that role in September 2024, including his request for a severance payment exceeding $660,000.
These revelations come amid heightened scrutiny over the vetting process for senior diplomatic appointments in the UK. Critics argue that the government should have carefully weighed the potential reputational and political consequences of appointing a figure with prior associations to a notorious convicted criminal.
Read More: UK monarchy reels from Andrew’s stunning arrest
The disclosure has reignited public debate over Epstein’s network and the responsibilities of high-ranking officials to avoid links that could compromise the country’s international standing. Observers say the files highlight the tension between political expediency and reputational safeguarding in sensitive diplomatic appointments.