The Metropolitan Police say they have received a referral from the government over Peter Mandelson's emails to Jeffery Epstein. 

A spokesperson said: "We can confirm that a referral from government has been received. We anticipate that we'll provide a further update later."

A little earlier, the government said they had referred to the police an assessment of how Lord Mandelson handled sensitive government information while he was a minister.

An initial review by the Cabinet Office of documents released by the US Department of Justice has found that emails sent by Lord Mandelson to the paedophile financier Epstein likely contain market sensitive information relating to the 2008 financial crash and official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.

The Metropolitan Police yesterday said it was aware of the latest release of files related to Epstein and confirmed it had received "a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in a public office". 

Yesterday, Ella Marriott, Commander of the Met, said: "The reports will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation.

"As with any matter, if new and relevant information is brought to our attention we will assess it, and investigate as appropriate."

 The Cabinet Office has referred material to the police after an initial review of Epstein files documents showed documents sent by Peter Mandelson to Jeffrey Epstein likely contain market sensitive information and suggested that "safeguards were compromised".

Lord Mandelson has not responded to the latest allegations.

Hear the latest from our deputy political editor Sam Coates...

Downing Street has released a readout of what they say Starmer told cabinet members this morning.

The prime minister is said to have told them that Lord Mandelson had "let the country down" and repeated his earlier call for him to no longer be a member of the House of Lords or use his title.

You can see the part of the readout relating to Starmer's comments on Epstein below:

The prime minister opened cabinet by addressing recent developments relating to Peter Mandelson.

The prime minister said he was appalled by the information that had emerged over the weekend in the Epstein files.

He said the alleged passing on of emails of highly sensitive government business was disgraceful, adding that he was not reassured that the totality of the information had yet emerged.

The prime minister told cabinet that Peter Mandelson should no longer be a member of the House of Lords or use the title and said that he had asked the cabinet secretary to review all available information regarding Mandelson's contacts with Jeffrey Epstein during his time serving as a government minister.

He said he had made it clear the government would cooperate with the police in any inquiries they carried out. But he said the government had to press and go further, working at speed in the Lords, including legislatively, if necessary.

He reiterated that there was a need to move at pace. The prime minister said Peter Mandelson had let his country down. He added the public don't really see individuals in this scandal, they see politicians.

For the public to see politicians saying they can't recall receiving significant sums of money or not was just gobsmacking - causing them to lose faith in all politicians and weaken trust still further.

The prime minister said that was why moving quickly in this matter was vital. 

Government officials are drafting legislation to strip Lord Mandelson of his peerage, the prime minister's official spokesperson has said.

The spokesperson says the government is prepared to legislate to kick Mandelson out of the House of Lords if needed.

Yesterday, the government said Mandelson should no longer be a member of the Lords and should no longer use his peerage - but that doing so would require an Act of Parliament.

The PM's spokesperson said Sir Keir Starmer had told his cabinet this morning that the government had to go further in the Lords, "including legislatively if necessary".

The spokesperson also said they will publish proposals as soon as possible on the broader need to "remove transgressors" more quickly from the Lords.

Starmer also told his cabinet he was "appalled" by the revelations that have emerged over the weekend, and that Mandelson had "let the country down".

"Moving quickly in this matter is vital," Starmer told his cabinet.

Mandelson could also resign from the Lords - though would keep his title - but has not yet made any indication that he will.

The Cabinet Office has referred how Peter Mandelson handled sensitive government information while he was a minister to the police.

Officials have handed over an assessment of how they think Lord Mandelson broke strict information handling procedures.

An initial review by the Cabinet Office of documents released by the US Department of Justice has found that emails sent by Lord Mandelson to the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein likely contain market sensitive information relating to the 2008 crash and official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.

Paste BN understands that the Cabinet Office's referral to the police was made today.

The prime minister's official spokesperson said they were cooperating fully with the police and ready to assist them in any way needed.

The police are reviewing information, before deciding whether to launch an official investigation. 

The Metropolitan Police last night said it was aware of the latest release of files related to Epstein and that it had received "a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in a public office".

That came after emails appeared to show conversations between Mandelson and Epstein about government and political matters while the former was serving as business secretary and the de-facto deputy prime in Gordon Brown's government.

Mandelson has previously said: "I was wrong to believe Epstein following his conviction and to continue my association with him afterwards. I apologise unequivocally for doing so to the women and girls who suffered."

In an interview with The Times carried out last week but published on Monday, Mandelson referred to a "handful of misguided historical emails, which I deeply regret sending", and described Epstein as "muck that you can't get off your shoe".

By Ben Bloch, political reporter

In the wake of a series of revelations about Peter Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly during the period he was de facto deputy-PM in Gordon Brown's government, Sir Keir Starmer is facing calls to pass legislation to kick him out of the House of Lords.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey has said it is "the very least they can do for the victims and survivors" of the convicted paedophile, and the SNP say they have a bill "ready to go" for the government to advance.

So why hasn't No 10 done it?

Although the PM's team is clear that they want Mandelson gone, there is no mechanism to remove a peerage once it has been awarded.

The only way to remove someone from the House of Lords is through an Act of Parliament, and although that was done in 1917 for a group of "enemies" of the UK in the First World War, it has never been done for an individual peer.

There are fears in No 10 that if they did table such legislation, it could get bogged down by amendments from peers who do not want to set a precedent that the government of the day could use against any peer they deem has behaved badly.

The Conservative Party - which has the largest number of peers in the upper chamber - is effectively backing that position.

Shadow cabinet minister Alex Burghart said this morning that he believes in "due process", and if Mandelson is found to have broken the law, he would support moving to remove the disgraced peer.

Leader Kemi Badenoch was also clear to broadcasters this morning that if a peer has been "convicted of criminal offences, then yes, I don't think people should be sitting in the Lords".

Watch: Why hasn't Mandelson been stripped of peerage?

No 10 is certainly not ruling out tabling legislation to remove Mandelson directly, but they believe that getting agreement from all parties on reforms to the process for removing a peer is the quickest solution (barring the sacked former ambassador resigning, which is the preferred expedient option).

Sources have told Paste BN that the government is working "at pace" to reach an agreement with the other parties in the Lords, but the longer it takes, the more pressure increases on No 10 to take unilateral action, which they believe has its own risks.

The latest revelations around Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein are far from the first scandal to engulf him.

In fact, Lord Mandelson has been involved in a series of scandals, dating back to his time as a cabinet minister in the New Labour governments.

Known as the prince of darkness, he was famed for his mastery of the art of spin.

Lord Mandelson, at the time Labour MP for Hartlepool, was first forced to resign his cabinet job of trade and industry secretary in 1998 after failing to disclose a loan for a home from Labour millionaire Geoffrey Robinson to his building society.

He returned to cabinet the following year as Northern Ireland secretary - but was forced to resign again in 2001 over claims he helped businessman Srichand Hinduja with an application for a UK passport.

He was cleared of any wrongdoing two months later - but it was too late to save his cabinet job.

He quit the Commons - and the UK - in 2004 to work for the EU - where he was accused of inappropriate links to various businessmen, including claims he accepted hospitality on a Russian oligarch's £80m yacht.

At the time, Mandelson denied giving or receiving any favours in return.

When his term as EU commissioner ended, he returned to the UK - and was put into the Lords by Gordon Brown, to become business secretary and de-facto deputy prime minister.

It's this period where Lord Mandelson is alleged to have leaked sensitive information to Jeffrey Epstein.

After Labour left government, he left frontline politics - until he started offering Sir Keir Starmer advice in the run up to the 2024 General Election.

After winning the election, Starmer appointed Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US in late 2024.

He was sacked as ambassador in September when more details over his relationship to Epstein came to light.

It's this history that Labour's political opponents are using to question Starmer's judgement - and that of his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeny.

On today's episode of Politics at Sam and Anne's, the pair discuss the political reaction to the Epstein files across Westminster - and whether the saga has the potential to break British politics.

Watch an excerpt of today's episode below...

There could be a "crunch point" in parliament tomorrow as the opposition is considering forcing the government to publish documents related to Peter Mandelson's appointment as ambassador in Washington, our deputy political editor Sam Coates has learned.

He explained on Mornings With Ridge And Frost that the Conservative Party could use its opposition day debate tomorrow to table a humble address - a motion that would be binding on the government that is usually used by parliament to compel the government of the day to provide information.

"Parliament has the power to force disclosure of pretty much anything in government, and the Tories smell blood," he explained.

Parliament could force disclosure of:

• The due diligence work conducted before Mandelson's appointment;
• The results of the vetting conducted;
• Any security concerns raised (which would have to be disclosed to a select committee) - and Sam revealed this morning that concerns were raised around Mandelson's financial connections ahead of his appointment (more here).

Normally an opposition motion would not trouble a government - certainly not one with as big a majority as Labour's.

But fury with the PM's chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, could put No 10 in some peril, as he is viewed as a "factional figure" who was close to Mandelson, and has not been a great chief of staff.

Sam said: "I have been talking to Labour MPs over the last 24 hours, and they tell me they could abstain or maybe even vote with a Tory motion 'if it deals with the problem of Morgan McSweeney'.

"There is a huge amount of anger, and there is a chance right now that within 24 hours, Keir Starmer finds himself in serious difficulty on the floor of the House of Commons."