Mandelson

[CollieModdle]

Should he / will he face criminal charges?
For sending sensitive / confidential information to Epstein?

Obviously the man’s integrity was in the sewer and it would break every code of good practice in public office to discuss raising Epstein’s point of view with the Chancellor but that probably counts as misconduct rather than criminal?

But forwarding sensitive e mails that could threaten the financial security of the country?

I don't think it is any less serious than spying @JoyintheMorning . He was betraying our Government to outsiders. That's what spies do!

Starmer will probably brief out McSweeney lines but it’s on him as leader.

What I want to know is how we might be able to improve our systems and processes in ways that will help to safeguard us against such bad judgements in the future.

I would also like to know how. If someone has a skeleton in their cupboard which so far has been kept secret how is anyone to find out?
I wonder what the security services said to Starmer when Mandy was appointed ambassador, as if they knew about Epstein then surely they would’ve said.

Another thing is proving rumours are right. A few years ago there was that shocking case of the fantasist Carl Beech who claimed that senior Tories and military top brass had parties where boys were sexually abused and murdered.
His ludicrous claims were swallowed by the police and broadcast by Labour politician Tom Watson.

Quite a few posters on here also swallowed the rumours.

Is it unreasonable to treat the Mandelson case as equal in seriousness to The Cambridge Spies and Anthony Blunt.

Personally I don’t. Blunt & co knowingly sent their countrymen to their deaths.

I think the recommendation comes from the Foreign Secretary, with the PMs approval and that goes to the monarch of the day for sign off.

I'm imaging that Mandelson wanted this post and put himself forwards for it. He didn't get the University of Oxford Chancellorship job, which he was quite heavily tipped to get. They must really be counting their blessings on that dodged bullet!!!

Yes.
There should be a full in investigation of what he did, why he did it, how he did it and HOW IS THAT NO ONE REALISED WHAT HE WAS DOING!

The Cambridge Spies directly caused people’s deaths, imprisonment and torture - Ben Macintyre’s book on Kim Philby is really good for anyone who wants to know the story. And they betrayed military and national security secrets to explicit national enemies for decades. So I don’t think it’s quite the same.

But I do think anyone chumming around with Epstein after his first conviction was explicitly conniving in the sexual exploitation of young women. Hell, any adult man flown in to a private island and being met with sexually available teenagers shouldn’t need a bloody priest to tell him he’s got himself involved in something morally horrifying.

@EasternStandard not picking on you but because I remember we were discussing it on a thread at the time: one thing playing on my mind at the moment is Angela Rayner. I don’t like her, I think it was right that she resigned. But that was a woman who yes, maybe wanted to get richer, but who basically failed to interrogate tax advice she’d been given by professionals. And at least part of her motivation was to ensure that her disabled child had a secure lifelong home. The comparison between her and the men resigning over this stuff fully decades after it happened makes me want to spit.

When I read the EM quote I was thinking of Kemi Badenoch and the extra barriers she faces, although she has done extremely well to overcome them.

Slightly tangentially, I read somewhere in all this Mandelson coverage that he waxes the back of his hands which I thought was very odd and strange.

Then I saw this photo today - pink jumper on left. He's obviously giving the waxer a swerve at the moment.

www.thetimes.com/imageserver/image/%2F97b05ee9-5ad3-4072-8d50-4e5039e95c2a.jpg?crop=4800%2C2700%2C0%2C0&resize=360

MushMonster · Today 13:02
Yes.
There should be a full in investigation of what he did, why he did it, how he did it and HOW IS THAT NO ONE REALISED WHAT HE WAS DOING

I agree, but how can tabs be kept on everyone all of the time - unless there are East Germany style of surveillance with recording devices in people’s homes and security following individuals everywhere they go.

The most egregious thing AR did wasn't the tax evasion. It was over-valuing her house and then selling it to her son's trust for exactly the amount she needed for her new flat deposit. She breached the fiduciary duty of a trustee to the trust beneficiary IMO.

Also you and I can't blame the dodgy advice an accountant gives you sadly when it comes to HMRC..

People checking on those related to government do exist and they are 100% meant to be spying on this people.

I am old and thought I was impervious to political scandals but this has left even me gobsmacked.

People checking on those related to government do exist and they are 100% meant to be spying on this people.

Really? How did the affairs of John Major and Edwina Currie and John Prescott and his PA not get found out?

Well he has at least resigned from the Lords now

And the Cabinet Office have referred material to the police.

Criminal conviction , lose your peerage and any other awards etc

Its really not that hard to work out

I am not one of them, sorry I cannot answer that question, but I do want the answer!
Are there not enough of them? Did this guy pass an original monitoring and then they gave up? Is that they do not have resources? Or are they into it too? What happened?

@38thparallel Is it possible that the security services did know about Major and Edwina Currie, but it was kept confidential because there was no security risk.

She had a high standard of clearance as a Minister or recent ex Minister. It is not as if she worked for the Russians
Similar with Prescott. Little risk of blackmail or passing anything important over to anyone.

I wonder if insider dealing or trading could be considered as one of the charges to be brought? Given the passing of market sensitive information.

JoyintheMorning · Today 17:11
Is it possible that the security services did know about Major and Edwina Currie, but it was kept confidential because there was no security risk

I hadn’t thought of that but you may well be right.

Re spying on communications - emails, phone calls - presumably anyone in government nowadays who was doing something illegal would know the risks and use burner phones.
What about old fashioned letters? Can the security services open private mail sent from government officials?
i don’t think even stasi levels of surveillance can guarantee total knowledge.

Children who were sexually exploited or Children who were forcibly prostituted
not child prostitution

That picture in the underpants. OMG I wonder who took it.

What were Johnson’s contracts with mates?

I’m not saying all transgressions are the same but when you look at the number of Labour cabinet ministers and MPs who have already had to resign you have to conclude that Labour is not the party to end sleaze in politics.

He says he doesn't remember the woman, the place or his budgie smugglers.🤢