Conservatives demand answers over missing Mandelson Files
|
Today [Friday 24th April 2026] the Conservatives have raised
concerns that the Labour Government is planning to not comply with
Parliament's Humble Address and asked questions over key missing
documents. At the Foreign Affairs Select Committee this week
Catherine Little, Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office, stated
that all documents relating to the Prime Minister's decision to
appoint Peter Mandelson UK Ambassador to Washington had already
been released. However,...Request free
trial
Today [Friday 24th April 2026] the Conservatives have raised concerns that the Labour Government is planning to not comply with Parliament's Humble Address and asked questions over key missing documents. At the Foreign Affairs Select Committee this week Catherine Little, Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office, stated that all documents relating to the Prime Minister's decision to appoint Peter Mandelson UK Ambassador to Washington had already been released. However, files already released conspicuously did not include any notes from the Prime Minister or his closest advisers relating to the appointment. That is why Alex Burghart MP, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has written to Cabinet Secretary Dame Antonio Romeo demanding answers. Alex Burghart MP's full letter is below: “Dear Antonia, URGENT CLARIFICATION ON HM GOVERNMENT COMPLIANCE WITH HUMBLE ADDRESS I appreciate that the events surrounding the appointment of Peter Mandelson as Ambassador happened some time before you became Cabinet Secretary and I am grateful to you for the work you are doing to ensure that the truth is revealed about how that appointment came to be made. I am sure you will agree that confidence in the Centre of Government can only be restored if Parliament and the public are shown exactly what happened. Following the appearance of Catherine Little, the Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office, at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee today, I am concerned that the Government is not releasing to Parliament all the documents relating to Peter Mandelson as commanded by the humble Address agreed by the House of Commons in February. I write in the context of concerns that ministers may not have given accurate information to Parliament, and the imminent early Prorogation of Parliament, which appears to be designed to limit scrutiny of the Government's actions. I therefore seek urgent clarification on three points:
The humble Address as passed by the House of Commons requires: ‘the Government to lay before this House all papers relating to Lord Mandelson's appointment as His Majesty's Ambassador to the United States of America.'[1] In her evidence session Ms Little in response to a question from Aphra Brandreth said: “In the humble Address Volume 1 that has already been published, we have shared all of the documentation relating to the Prime Minister's decision. That is already published and publicly available.”[2] I cannot believe this is the case. The Government has released no record of the Prime Minister's actual decision on either the 11 November 2024 or the 11 December 2024 box notes. Nor are there minutes of any meeting with the Prime Minister where this matter was discussed or indeed agreed – and we know from the cover note on the 11 December 2024 box note that such meetings took place. Indeed that release contained no material from the Prime Minister, none from his then Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney, and none from Peter Mandelson. Specifically, and as an example of some of the documents which are evidently missing, where is the Box Return showing the Prime Minister's manuscript comments on the submission of 11 November 2024? Or the submission of 11 December 2024? Where are the comments by his Chief of Staff or other special advisers? Where are the copies of any relevant Billet Doux? Where are the records of internal discussions progress chasing on the appointment? Are there no other records of any internal meeting relating to the decision to appoint Lord Mandelson? For example, was there not any pre-discussion between the Propriety and Ethics Team and the Cabinet Secretary's office? Where are the drafts and emails relating to the Cabinet Secretary's letter of 11 November 2024? Please can you clarify whether these documents are to be published in due course, and if so when, or whether they being withheld for some reason, and if so what?
Sir John Whittingdale questioned whether there was a minute of the Prime Minister's decision to appoint Mandelson. Little, in her response, appeared to suggest that no such minute had yet been recovered saying ‘We have undertaken further investigation [to recover documentation]'. It is very worrying that this document has not yet been released. It is my opinion that:
I am sure you would agree either outcome would be of extreme concern about the way that this Prime Minister runs his Number 10 operation. Please can you offer specific and urgent clarification of this point?
In response to questions from Aphra Brandreth, Ms Little did not say whether a search of ministerial phones had taken place. The humble Address explicitly called on the Government to release “electronic communications”. The first volume of the humble Address return contains no electronic communications beyond electronic mail. I am concerned that just today The Spectator[3] reported excerpts from the Prime Minister's electronic exchange with Peter Mandelson, yet nothing has been set before the House in volume one of the humble Address. The Secretary of State for Health, Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, has taken the step of providing his messages with Peter Mandelson.[4] We would expect the same from all serving and former Ministers who had contact, civil servants and special advisers – and inquires made of those who might have suffered the misfortune to lose their phones. Please clarify what is the nature of the search that has taken place of material on the phones of Ministers, civil servants, special advisers and Peter Mandelson and whether the Cabinet Office therefore holds all relevant information. Can you also clarify whether these searches cover both personal and official devices, and whether all individuals have complied? Again, I am concerned that the Cabinet Office maybe deciding what it wants to release rather than the full extent of the humble Address. I will remind you, the humble Address was agreed by Parliament to be maximalist. Furthermore, as former Attorney General Rt Hon Sir Michael Ellis KC notes in The Times there is no legal impediment to the government setting out which documents are being withheld and the subject of the police investigation, so I therefore also request a list of those documents be published in the public interest.[5] I would be very happy to discuss this matter with you in person. Given the gravity of these inquiries, the time pressure of prorogation (and the possibility that this information may require Ministers to be questioned in the House), and the intention by the Foreign Affairs Committee to call further witnesses next week, please would you respond to these concerns by close of business on Friday, 24 April 2026. SHADOW CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER Please note I am placing a copy of this letter in the public domain." ENDS Notes to Editors [1] Hansard, Lord Mandelson, 4 February 2026, link. [2] Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Work of the FCDO: Evidence: Catherline Little, 23 April 2026, link. [3] The Spectator, How the Civil Service turned against Starmer, 23 April 2026, link. |