UK Foreign Office Reviews Pay-Off to Ex-Ambassador Amid Epstein-Linked Scandal
Lord Peter Mandelson’s taxpayer-funded severance following his dismissal as British ambassador to Washington is under official review after fresh revelations about his association with Jeffrey Epstein.
The United Kingdom’s Foreign Office has launched a formal review of the severance payment made to Lord Peter Mandelson after his dismissal as ambassador to the United States, as fresh disclosures in the ongoing Epstein files deepen political scrutiny.
Mandelson, a veteran Labour Party peer, was removed from his post in September 2025 after emails released by the United States Department of Justice indicated a closer relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein than was previously disclosed and suggested he may have shared sensitive government information during his earlier ministerial career.
The payout, reportedly equivalent to three months’ salary and estimated at up to fifty-five thousand pounds before tax, was agreed as part of his exit from the diplomatic service.
Pressure has grown across Westminster for greater transparency around the payment’s size and legitimacy.
Government allies and opponents alike have called on Mandelson to consider returning the taxpayer-funded sum or donating it to a charity supporting victims, in light of the revelations.
The review was initiated after the latest tranche of documents revived concerns about the ex-envoy’s conduct and amid a separate police probe into potential misconduct in public office involving searches of two properties associated with him.
A Foreign Office spokesperson confirmed that normal civil service human resources processes were followed when terminating Mandelson’s employment but said the department is now reassessing the settlement "in light of further information that has now been revealed" and ongoing investigations.
Senior ministers, including the work and pensions secretary, have publicly suggested that returning or reallocating the funds could address public unease.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who appointed Mandelson to the Washington post and later dismissed him, has faced intense political pressure over his judgment in making the appointment.
The review’s findings and additional parliamentary disclosures of related papers are expected to feature in debates over accountability and standards in public appointments.
The unfolding situation continues to shape discourse within the governing Labour Party and across the broader political landscape about ethical governance and the use of public funds.
Mandelson, a veteran Labour Party peer, was removed from his post in September 2025 after emails released by the United States Department of Justice indicated a closer relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein than was previously disclosed and suggested he may have shared sensitive government information during his earlier ministerial career.
The payout, reportedly equivalent to three months’ salary and estimated at up to fifty-five thousand pounds before tax, was agreed as part of his exit from the diplomatic service.
Pressure has grown across Westminster for greater transparency around the payment’s size and legitimacy.
Government allies and opponents alike have called on Mandelson to consider returning the taxpayer-funded sum or donating it to a charity supporting victims, in light of the revelations.
The review was initiated after the latest tranche of documents revived concerns about the ex-envoy’s conduct and amid a separate police probe into potential misconduct in public office involving searches of two properties associated with him.
A Foreign Office spokesperson confirmed that normal civil service human resources processes were followed when terminating Mandelson’s employment but said the department is now reassessing the settlement "in light of further information that has now been revealed" and ongoing investigations.
Senior ministers, including the work and pensions secretary, have publicly suggested that returning or reallocating the funds could address public unease.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who appointed Mandelson to the Washington post and later dismissed him, has faced intense political pressure over his judgment in making the appointment.
The review’s findings and additional parliamentary disclosures of related papers are expected to feature in debates over accountability and standards in public appointments.
The unfolding situation continues to shape discourse within the governing Labour Party and across the broader political landscape about ethical governance and the use of public funds.
