Epstein files spark UK political storm around Lord Mandelson and Gordon Brown-era documents

A new release of “Epstein files” in the United States has triggered a fast-moving political crisis in the United Kingdom, centering on claims that Lord Mandelson shared sensitive government material with Jeffrey Epstein while serving in Gordon Brown’s cabinet. The fallout widened over the weekend as questions grew about money transfers linked to Mandelson and his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, and as veteran broadcaster Trevor Phillips publicly warned Mandelson that his public career was effectively finished.

What the latest Epstein files include

The latest disclosure is part of a large, rolling public release tied to a federal transparency law, with the U.S. Justice Department uploading millions of pages of material and warning that some highly sensitive content remains withheld or heavily redacted. Officials have also acknowledged that the scale of the release has created risks of redaction errors, including accidental disclosure of identifying information related to survivors.

The material has been promoted as a broad trove of documents, images, and other records from the government’s Epstein and Maxwell investigations, though not all records have been published due to legal and victim-protection constraints.

Brown orders an inquiry into alleged leaks

On Monday, February 2, 2026 (ET), former Prime Minister Gordon Brown requested that the cabinet secretary open an official inquiry into whether Mandelson disclosed confidential, market-sensitive information from the business department during the 2008–2009 financial crisis period.

The most pointed example circulating in the newly released documents is a June 13, 2009 email thread about “Business issues” that contained internal thinking on policy options and references to government assets. The documents show Mandelson forwarding the message to Epstein with a note indicating it had gone to the prime minister, followed by Epstein asking what “salable assets” might be. Brown has called for findings to be made public quickly, framing the matter as a breach of trust at a moment of national economic vulnerability.

The money trail and Reinaldo Avila da Silva

The documents have also intensified scrutiny of financial transfers connected to Mandelson and to da Silva. Records cited in recent coverage describe three payments of $25,000 linked to Epstein accounts: one in 2003 to a bank account associated with da Silva that listed Mandelson as a beneficiary, and two in 2004 to accounts identified with Mandelson.

Separately, emails and related material describe Epstein sending £10,000 in September 2009 to da Silva, described as help with an osteopathy course and other expenses at a time when Mandelson was a serving cabinet minister. Mandelson has said he has no record or recollection of receiving certain funds and has raised concerns that some documents may be inaccurate or incomplete.

It remains unclear, based on what has been made public, whether all referenced transfers were completed, how they were recorded, and whether any declarations were required or made under the relevant rules in force at the time.

Trevor Phillips delivers a blunt message

The dispute spilled onto Sunday political television in the UK when Trevor Phillips — speaking at about 10:51 a.m. ET on Sunday, February 1, 2026 — addressed Mandelson directly, calling him a longtime friend while arguing that the accumulation of revelations made his position untenable.

The moment mattered because it pushed the story beyond partisan lines: Phillips framed it less as a tactical scandal and more as a reputational cliff-edge, suggesting that Mandelson’s ties to Epstein had finally crossed a point where political survival was no longer realistic.

Resignation pressure and the House of Lords question

Mandelson has already resigned his membership in the Labour Party, saying he did not want to cause “further embarrassment” while he reviews allegations that he disputes. Pressure has since moved to whether he should resign from the House of Lords and whether the chamber can modernize its disciplinary tools to impose meaningful sanctions in cases involving alleged misconduct.

Police review has also entered the conversation. UK authorities have indicated they will assess whether any allegations meet a criminal threshold, though no charging decision has been announced and key evidentiary questions remain unresolved.

What happens next

The next phase is likely to be procedural and document-heavy rather than dramatic: internal government review, possible referral questions, and the slow work of validating what specific records mean and whether they show wrongdoing or poor judgment without illegality.

Key developments to watch in the coming days:

• Whether the cabinet secretary’s inquiry produces a public report with confirmed findings and timelines

• Whether UK police open a formal investigation tied to disclosure of confidential information

• Whether Mandelson is asked to provide evidence to U.S. investigators or lawmakers

• Whether additional releases add context that clarifies what was shared, when, and why

Sources consulted: U.S. Department of Justice; ABC News; The Guardian; The Irish Times