The latest Mandelson files do not explain why he was appointed despite risks

This article appeared as part of the Daily Sensemaker newsletter – one story a day to make sense of the world. To receive it in your inbox, featuring content exclusive to the newsletter, sign up for free here.

The government has released 1,500 pages of documents relating to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to Washington. They contain several juicy exchanges in which Mandelson described advisors in Number 10 as “rubbish”, said Starmer “lacks verve” and complained that Labour MPs wanted to raise taxes to fund benefits. The government has described the disclosure as “an unprecedented piece” of transparency. But several key files are missing including a summary of the vetting report into Mandelson, who resigned over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. The scandal surrounding the former Labour peer’s appointment raises questions about why he was installed in Washington despite concerns that he posed a security risk. It is still not clear what measures were put in place to mitigate these concerns.