Lord Mandelson is set to be summoned to give evidence before Congress over his links to the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Sources familiar with the plans of the US House Oversight Committee say preparations are under way to issue a formal request for Lord Mandelson to testify in Washington.
The committee, which has overseen the release of large volumes of government-held Epstein material, believes the former Labour powerbroker may hold crucial information about individuals who enabled the financier’s crimes.
On Sunday evening, Lord Mandelson announced he was leaving the Labour Party.
In a resignation letter to party general secretary Hollie Ridley, he wrote: “I do not wish to cause further embarrassment to the Labour Party.”
He added that he regretted being “further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein”.
Freshly released Department of Justice (DoJ) files published on Friday detailed Lord Mandelson’s financial dealings with Epstein.
The documents suggest Epstein transferred around $50,000 (£36,500) to Lord Mandelson in 2004.
The documents suggest Epstein transferred around $50,000 (£36,500) to Lord Mandelson in 2004
|
GETTY
A separate document claimed a payment of £10,000 was made in 2009 to his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, to fund osteopathy training.
Emails from December 2009 – when Lord Mandelson was serving as Business Secretary – appear particularly damaging.
In an email with Epstein about Labour proposals to curb bankers’ bonuses, he appeared to write that he was “trying hard to amend” the policy.
He also suggested that JP Morgan chief Jamie Dimon should contact then-Chancellor Alistair Darling and “mildly threaten” him.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN – READ THE LATEST:
PICTURED: Lord Mandelson appearing to talk to a woman in his underwear in the newly released documents
|
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Lord Mandelson has repeatedly affirmed his ‘regret’ over his friendship with the disgraced financier
|
HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
A spokesman for Lord Mandelson has disputed aspects of the material, saying neither he nor his husband has “any record or recollection of receiving payments” from Epstein.
Lord Mandelson also questioned the veracity of the documents earlier on Sunday.
The ex-New Labour Cabinet Minister said: “There are also multiple formatting errors in the documents and I would like JP Morgan to confirm on the record that they are certain these documents are authentic and that the individual cheques are also authentic.
“Until this fact-checking has been achieved I maintain my original position which is that I have no record and no recollection of ever receiving these sums and that these statements are false.”
Kemi Badenoch accused the Prime Minister of presiding over a ‘cover-up’
|
PAConservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch previously launched a scathing attack on Sir Keir Starmer, accusing him of presiding over a “cover up”.
In a post on social media, she said: “If Keir Starmer had a backbone he would suspend Mandelson’s membership of the Labour Party and launch an immediate investigation into how Mandelson and his husband were being sent money by the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.”
Following Lord Mandelson’s resignation, Conservative figures intensified the pressure, noting that Sir Keir and his chief of staff had appointed him ambassador to Washington despite his known Epstein links.
The party has called for a full independent inquiry, citing what it described as the Prime Minister’s “appalling lack of judgment” and Downing Street’s direct role in the appointment.
Lord Mandelson is not expected to return to the House of Lords
|
GETTY
Lord Mandelson is not expected to return to the House of Lords, where he has been on a leave of absence since the scandal broke.
Although Congress cannot compel overseas witnesses, Lord Mandelson would be subject to a subpoena upon entering the US, with non-compliance risking arrest.
He was dismissed from his ambassadorial role in September after earlier revelations about his relationship with Epstein.
Although he retains his peerage, removing the title would require primary legislation – a step ministers are understood to be unlikely to take.
A Labour Party spokesman said: “The Labour Party takes all complaints seriously and they are investigated in line with our rules and procedures.”