MORE than 1,500 pages relating to Peter Mandelson’s controversial appointment as US ambassador were released yesterday.

Extraordinary exchanges – including texts, emails and official papers – were forced into the open amid the scandal surrounding the government.

Sign up for the Politics newsletter

Thank you!

A huge tranche of files linked to Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador have been released Credit: Paul Edwards

Explosive secret messages called Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership into question Credit: Reuters

The files revealed Mandelson’s desperate lobbying and Cabinet ministers’ explosive secret messages questioning Sir Keir Starmer‘s leadership.

But despite the bombshell revelations unearthed in the documents, No10 is facing “cover up” allegations from rival parties over missing information.

Some documents remain withheld because of an ongoing police probe, while others have been redacted on national security grounds. 

So, what questions still remain unanswered following yesterday’s tranche of files? And what impact does this have on the Prime Minister’s future?

THE SUN SAYS
Mandelson docs confirm Labour MPs back Benefits Street over nation’s grafters

JACK ELSOM
PM appointment of Mandy is unshakable millstone but Labour has a BIGGER scandal

Mandelson (pictured with paedo Jeffrey Epstein) was arrested and quizzed by Met cops in February as part of a probe into misconduct in public office Credit: Unknown

A hand-written note from Mandelson to David Lammy said he would ‘never regret’ making him US ambassador Credit: Cabinet Office/PA Wire

What files are missing?

The Government has insisted the publication represents unprecedented transparency involving every Whitehall department.

But swathes of pages are filled with redactions made by the Cabinet Office due to “national security and diplomatic relations”. 

And as MPs studied the documents yesterday, questions were raised in Parliament about whether all relevant material had been disclosed. 

Shadow Minister Alex Burghart said it “beggars belief” there was so little evidence of the PM’s involvement in Mandelson’s appointment.

He also asked if there were really no WhatsApp messages between the PM and the Labour peer relating to the appointment. 

Mr Burghart said: “In all of these documents the Prime Minister’s presence is almost non-existent.

“Despite the fact he was appointing a man to be head of our most senior mission, we have almost nothing in his name. 

“It is as though somehow he appointed Peter Mandelson as ambassador without leaving any documentary trace of that decision at all.”

Why wasn’t vetting summary released? 

The files have been forced into the open after MPs demanded publication of documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment.

But one specific document that was held back is the summary of the vetting process Lord Mandelson underwent.

Mandelson was arrested and quizzed by Met cops in February as part of a probe into misconduct in public office.

Scotland Yard had asked No10 to withhold some of the file dump amid fears it could interfere with its criminal investigation.

And the Intelligence and Security Committee has been scouring the files to make sure nothing jeopardises national security or foreign relations.

This means the public may never get insight into the warnings made by security officials about Mandelson’s appointment.

Last month it emerged that the PM hired Lord Mandelson despite the ex-Cabinet Minister failing his security vetting.

Sir Keir then sacked the Foreign Office’s top civil servant Sir Olly Robbins, who in turn denied any wrongdoing.

Can the PM survive this?

Some of the most shocking messages showed Sir Keir’s leadership being repeatedly called into question by Labour’s own top brass.

Among the most damaging revelations were secret messages showing ministers discussing a “mutinous” Parliamentary Labour Party.

Exchanges also featured a growing “anti-Keir tide” and fears the Prime Minister’s authority could be destroyed by humiliating U-turns.

In one exchange during Labour’s winter fuel payments crisis, then Cabinet Office Minister Pat McFadden said: “Doesn’t feel good for Keir.”

Mr McFadden warned there was “a lot of manoeuvring” involving senior figures including Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband.

Lord Mandelson replied Sir Keir was “not leading from the front” and claimed Labour MPs were in a “mutinous state”.

Weeks later, as ministers fought to save welfare reforms from a backbench rebellion, Mandelson warned there was a “strong anti-Keir tide”.

He then suggested defeat could threaten the Prime Minister’s future.

Why was there a scramble to get Mandelson in position?

Files show that before being appointed, Mandelson had personally lobbied then-Foreign Secretary David Lammy.

He wrote that dealing with Donald Trump’s administration would require “super-human skills and luck”.  

And a hand-written note from Mandelson to Mr Lammy said he would ensure the government would “never regret” making him US ambassador. 

But Sir Keir Starmer’s national security adviser previously said the Labour peer’s appointment was “weirdly rushed”.

Jonathan Powell, who served as Tony Blair‘s Chief of Staff, raised concerns to the PM about Mandelson before his December 2024 appointment.

Sir Philip Barton, the Foreign Office’s top civil servant at the time, said he was “presented with a decision and told to get on with it”.

Sir Philip said the normal process had been flipped, with Mandelson’s appointment announced before full “developed vetting” had even begun.

But Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s former right-hand man, insisted he did not push officials to wave the appointment through “at all costs”.

Why did Mandy refuse to share his texts?

Among the files, it was revealed yesterday that Mandelson had refused to hand over WhatsApp messages from his personal phone.

He apparently “declined to comply” with requests to hand over his personal phone and allow officials access to material stored on it.

Officials had sought WhatsApp messages and other information linked to his appointment as part of the disclosure exercise.

But he declined to provide information from his personal phone, shutting down a direct request from the government.

Officials had contacted Mandelson through his solicitors for information on his personal mobile.

But the files show Mandelson “declined to comply with this request”.

It adds: “The Government has no further recourse to search the personal devices of Peter Mandelson.”

The documents also do not include any messages from Mr McSweeney, whose phone was reported stolen last year.