Behind the curtain: Mandelson, Epstein & the machinery of elite influence

The personal & the political

The full extent of what has been uncovered is still emerging. But here in the UK, the revelations about Lord Peter Mandelson’s dealings with Jeffrey Epstein have already triggered the resignation or removal of several of the Prime Minister’s closest political collaborators.

Mandelson’s activities are now under investigation by the police and security services. Yet much of the commentary continues to treat this as a story about one man’s judgement, one man’s choices, one man’s proximity to a disgraced financier. That framing is not only inadequate — it is dangerous. Because what this scandal, and this explosive batch of the Epstein files, have begun to expose is not the personal failings of a few individuals, but the structural rot of a political system that no longer serves the public, but the private interests of a powerful and privileged few.

We already know that Mandelson shared internal government information with Epstein, and promised to use his position to lobby the Treasury and even the Prime Minister on banking policies favourable to his close friend, a convicted paedophile. But this is not centrally a story about personal misjudgement. It is a story about a political culture in which the wealthy and well‑connected can whisper into the machinery of the state and expect it to move.

And this episode is far from isolated. The Palantir saga — also further illuminated by the recent file dump — has raised serious questions about how a company with deep ties to Silicon Valley billionaires, US intelligence networks and global far‑right political operators has been able to embed itself in the UK’s most sensitive public systems, with £675million worth of contracts (many rewarded without tender). Not through open debate or democratic scrutiny, but through private meetings, elite networks and a lobbying ecosystem that operates almost entirely out of public view. Like Mandelson’s career, Palantir’s influence is not confined to a single government or premiership. It transcends them, continuing unabated as leaders come and go.

The public & the powerful

These stories are symptoms of the same disease: a democracy increasingly bent around the gravitational pull of extreme wealth. And the problem is accelerating. Recent Oxfam research shows billionaire wealth has risen 81% in the last decade, and that that wealth is easily traded for political influence that protects and multiplies it. Seven of the ten largest media companies are now owned by billionaires. And that if the wealthy support a policy, it has a 45% chance of becoming law; if they oppose it, the chance collapses to 18%. The super‑rich are also 4,000 times more likely to hold political power themselves than everyone else.

This explains why many popular, common‑sense tax reforms — the ones that would have raised billions fairly, closed loopholes and strengthened public services — mysteriously vanished before they ever reached the Budget. What we called the “phantom budget” was the ghost of possibility murdered by the ruthless machinations of super‑rich vested‑interest lobbying.

And the consequences are now visible on the global stage. The UK has just hit a new low on the Global Corruption Index, dropping more than ten places in the last decade. The country was dragged down by record political donations from the super‑rich, cash‑for‑access politics, aggressive lobbying and a shrinking space for protest, journalism and people‑powered campaigns. Transparency International’s assessment was completed before the Mandelson–Epstein revelations. The picture has only darkened since.

The pushback & the path forward

Inequality is the defining issue of our age — it is creating a spiralling momentum that risks sucking democracy, decency and any hope of a better future down the drain. A political environment where the wealthiest actors can veto reform before it even reaches the public makes progressive change extraordinarily difficult. You cannot fix inequality while the people who benefit most from the status quo are shaping the rules behind closed doors.