Mandelson could face police inquiry over alleged leak to Epstein | Jeffrey Epstein

Peter Mandelson faces a possible police investigation over allegations he leaked sensitive market information to Jeffrey Epstein at the height of the financial crisis.

New revelations from the Epstein files show Mandelson sent the late sex offender a series of emails containing classified information the government had received to deal with the global crisis while he served as trade secretary under Gordon Brown.

Keir Starmer ordered an investigation by the cabinet secretary and demanded Mandelson’s resignation from the House of Lords. Brown also asked the cabinet secretary to investigate the alleged leaks to Epstein.

MPs lined up in parliament on Monday to express their anger at Mandelson’s apparent willingness to share British government documents with the disgraced US financier.

The SNP and Reform UK reported Mandelson to the police for misconduct in a public office. Emily Thornberry, Labor chair of the foreign affairs select committee, also said she believed his actions should merit a criminal investigation.

The Metropolitan Police has confirmed it has received a number of reports of alleged misconduct in a public office and is considering whether to launch a criminal investigation.

Commander Ella Marriott said: “All reports will be reviewed to determine whether they meet the criminal threshold for investigation. As with any matter, if new and relevant information is brought to our attention we will consider it and investigate appropriately.”

At least one email forwarded to Epstein (sent from a redacted address) copied an email address for “John Pond”; The Guardian understands this was the codename used by advisers when forwarding to Brown’s secure email account.

Emails passed to Epstein from the highest level of the UK government include:

• A secret UK government document outlining £20bn of asset sales.

• Mandelson claimed he was “trying hard” to change government policy on bankers’ bonuses.

• An imminent bailout for the euro a day before it was announced in 2010.

• A suggestion that the JPMorgan boss “mildly threatened” the chancellor.

A former adviser described the behavior as “traitorous” and said they hoped police would investigate. “You can imagine the sense of betrayal felt by those of us who worked around the clock during the crisis,” they said.

The emails are part of wide-ranging revelations about Epstein released Friday by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Earlier this week documents showed the disgraced financier had paid a total of $75,000 (£54,750) into bank accounts; Mandelson, then a Labor MP, was believed to be the beneficiary of these accounts. It is also alleged that Epstein sent £10,000 to his partner Reinaldo Avila da Silva, who is now Mandelson’s husband, in September 2009 to fund an osteopathy course and other expenses.

An email with the subject line “Employment issues” was sent by Brown’s special counsel, Nick Butler, on June 13, 2009; The email contained significant detail about policy measures the government was considering and suggested the government had £20bn in marketable assets.

Mandelson forwarded the email to Epstein and said: “An interesting memo to the Prime Minister.” Epstein asked Mandelson, “What marketable assets?” He answered by asking the question. The response, from a redacted email address, said: “Land, property, I think.”

Four months later the government announced plans to sell assets, hoping to raise £16 billion, including a property surplus.

Butler, who wrote the note, said he was considering reporting the matter to the police. “We — all the people involved in this email and many others — worked on a basis of trust, which allowed us to generate ideas. I am disgusted by the breach of trust that was likely intended to give Epstein a chance to make money,” he told the Times.

Brown said on Monday that he asked cabinet secretary Chris Wormald in September to investigate the possibility of sensitive market information being leaked to Epstein during the global financial crisis, but was told there was no evidence so far.

The former prime minister said it was “shocking new information coming to light” and said a “broader and more intensive investigation into the completely unacceptable disclosure of government documents and information at a time when the country is struggling with the global financial crisis” is now needed.

In another email dated May 9, 2010, Epstein asked Mandelson to approve a 500 billion euro bailout; the then trade minister said it would be announced that evening. The next day, Mandelson gave Epstein early notice of Gordon Brown’s resignation.

Starmer, who has no direct power to strip Mandelson of his title as Lord, is likely to face fresh questions over his decision to appoint Mandelson as US ambassador and his closeness to senior Labor figures including chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and health secretary Wes Streeting. Mandelson only resigned as a member of the Labor Party on Sunday.

No 10 wrote to House of Lords officials on Monday saying the upper house must urgently modernize its disciplinary procedures to strip him of his rank.

But a Lords source said little guidance or work had been done on how reforms to disciplinary procedures should be carried out, despite being included in Labour’s manifesto.

Government insiders hope the senior politician will choose to step down from the Lords voluntarily, but a No 10 source admitted they had received no assurances from Mandelson that he would resign voluntarily.

In another 2009 email that angered former colleagues, Mandelson said the Treasury was “doing research” on possible new taxes on bankers’ bonuses. Two days later, Epstein asked whether JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon should call the chancellor, Alistair Darling. In the response, Mandelson said he should have “mildly threatened” the chancellor.

The BBC’s economics editor, Faisal Islam, said he understood from his conversations with the late former chancellor that there was later a call between Darling and Dimon, as well as other senior bankers, to lobby for new bonus restrictions.

Former Undersecretary of the Treasury Nick Macpherson said there were suspicions about leaks at the time. “Alistair Darling and the official Treasury were always aware that investment banks had an inside track to No 10. But the arrogant nature of that inside track is quite breathtaking,” he said.

The Prime Minister’s principal secretary, Darren Jones, told the House of Commons on Monday that “a government minister of no political party should and should never behave in this way”.

He claimed that Mandelson lied about statements he made to the government before he was appointed ambassador to the United States. “But the important thing is that when someone lies in their declaration of interest, there must be consequences,” he said.

There is no precedent for removing a particular person from the House of Lords and this would require primary legislation. The last time this happened was when it was applied to a group of peers who sided with Britain’s enemies during the First World War.

No timeframe has been given for the Cabinet Office review and No 10 does not say it should be made public. The review could include examining documents at the National Archives and speaking to Mandelson and other contemporaries at No 10 while in correspondence with Epstein.

FCA declined to comment. Mandelson was asked for comment.