Lord Peter Mandelson was removed from his post as the United Kingdom's ambassador to the United States after Downing Street said supportive messages he sent to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein "materially" changed the calculation on whether he could continue in the role. MPs warned on Friday that, because the peer is on formal leave of absence from the House of Lords, he could resume parliamentary duties as early as December by giving three months' notice.
Downing Street told reporters the messages were the decisive factor in the government's decision to sack the former New Labour minister and European Commissioner. Mandelson has said he regrets continuing his friendship with Epstein after the latter's conviction in the United States. The peer's wider intentions following his removal were not immediately known.
Lord Mandelson, who was ennobled in 2008, has been on a leave of absence from the Lords that began at the end of January and was due to last for the remainder of the parliamentary session. Under the House of Lords companion to the rules, members on leave who wish to return must give written notice to the Clerk of the Parliaments at least three months before the day they wish to attend; the leave is then terminated three months from that notice or sooner if the House directs.
That provision prompted swift criticism from opposition MPs and some Conservatives who said the former cabinet minister should not be able to resume a legislative role after his removal as ambassador. Labour MP Kim Johnson said Mandelson should be "removed from the Lords," adding that he had been sacked yet still held party connections. A senior Labour source in the Lords disputed that Mandelson currently holds the party whip, saying his leave status means he does not.
SNP MP Brendan O'Hara tabled an early day motion in the Commons accusing Mandelson of bringing Parliament "into disrepute" and calling on the government to take legislative steps to remove his peerage. Conservative frontbencher Neil O'Brien said Mandelson "cannot return to being a lawmaker and a serving member of the House of Lords" after what he described as a third resignation in disgrace.
A Downing Street spokesman said whether Mandelson retains his peerage was "not a matter for me," reflecting the limited powers of the executive over honours once they have been conferred. There is no obvious mechanism within current Lords procedures to block an individual from returning from leave without a separate standards investigation or a decision by the House.
The controversy adds to scrutiny of the interplay between appointments to represent Britain abroad and the independent, often lifetime, nature of membership in the upper chamber. Critics said the episode highlighted what they described as gaps in parliamentary rules that allow peers to halt and resume duties with only short administrative notice.
Mandelson's sacking came after reports that he exchanged unusually supportive emails with Epstein, described by Downing Street as changing the government's assessment of his suitability for the ambassadorial role. Ministers and backbenchers said they would seek clarity on whether parliamentary or legislative measures are needed to address similar situations in future.