Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

Debate between Darren Jones and Kieran Mullan

Monday 16th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

I agree that all process should be followed, yes.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

The problem with these sorts of scandals is that as time moves on, more and more people are tarnished by them. Last week, when the papers revealed that Mandelson received £75,000, I asked the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister whether the Government were worried about what he might say at an employment tribunal. He said,

“That was not the rationale. The documents will speak for themselves.”—[Official Report, 11 March 2026; Vol. 782, c. 367.]

Of course, the documents do speak for themselves. They say that part of the business case for the payout—which the Minister was aware of, because it was sent to him—was that

“Given the reputational impact for HMG, a modest settlement as proposed is the recommended course of action”.

They also say that

“the individual has a high profile which could give rise to reputational damage to the FCDO and HMG were a court or tribunal claim to be pursued”,

which is exactly what I suggested based on what was in the papers, but which the Minister denied was part of the reasoning. Does he want to apologise for inadvertently misleading the House, and does he agree that those papers show that the Government broke Treasury rules on how such payments should be made?

[Darren Jones]

I think I said to the House last week, for the sake of clarity, that while I recognise that correspondence in the bundle mentions the business case being referred to me for my approval, that was never sent and was never received, so I was not privy to it as the hon. Gentleman suggests. On the basis of the severance payment, as I have said to the House, it was, based on advice, deemed to be the quickest way to get Peter Mandelson off civil service employment, and cheaper than maybe incurring the legal fees of a dispute at the employment tribunal.

Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address Motion

Debate between Darren Jones and Kieran Mullan

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

My hon. Friend and I are members of the labour movement because we share the same values. We are here to represent the voices of working people and those across the country who have no power and no access. That is what our movement was created to do, and we share that ambition. Do I recognise that we are still operating in a system where power and wealth can lead to these outcomes? Absolutely. Do we have a shared ambition to tackle that? Yes, we do.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

The Minister will know that the Government have a Bill about the duty of accountability and candour going through the House; one of his colleagues on the Front Bench will confirm that that requires Ministers to answer questions with candour. Several weeks ago, three Members of this House asked him what Mandelson’s pay-off was, and he refused to answer. I ask him to reflect on whether he acted with candour.

Back to the question of whether Mandelson deserved a pay-out, is it not the truth that the Government know that this tissue—this story or suggestion that they were lied to and that there was no possible way they could have found out the truth—would have been torn apart in an employment tribunal, and that is why they did not want to take the case to one?

[Darren Jones]

That was not the rationale. The documents will speak for themselves.

Standards in Public Life

Debate between Darren Jones and Kieran Mullan

Monday 9th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

The Prime Minister engages with a whole host of businesses, whether in the United Kingdom or abroad. The hon. Gentleman’s question suggested particular wrongdoing; as I said earlier to my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum), we have powers under the Procurement Act to act on these issues if we must. If evidence comes to light, we reserve the right to do so.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

The problem with the list of measures that the Chief Secretary read out is that, unfortunately, not one will protect us from the Prime Minister’s poor judgment. Before asking my question, I point out the fact that—as the right hon. Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) knows, and as the Chief Secretary has mentioned himself—the Government are currently introducing the duty of candour Bill, which will legally require Ministers to answer questions frankly and with any information that people could usefully think they should know. I ask for a third time: how much is Peter Mandelson due to take as part of his pay-off?

[Darren Jones]

As I have said, the Foreign Office will update the House in due course.

Growing the UK Economy

Debate between Darren Jones and Kieran Mullan

Wednesday 29th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Dr Kieran Mullan—I assume you have a lot to say.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

Away from Labour’s rhetoric, I suspect that Members on both sides of this House are hearing the reality from our constituents. On Friday, I visited Saxonwood care home in my constituency, and St Michael’s hospice just across the border, which looks after my constituents. I have also heard from Bexhill chamber of commerce, and they are all clear that Labour’s planned national insurance rise will do enormous damage to their attempts to grow, and to employ people. Does the Chief Secretary agree with the OBR’s forecast that the jobs tax will harm growth, not help it?

[Darren Jones]

As has been rehearsed repeatedly on the Floor of the House, the Chancellor had to make difficult decisions to get a grip on the public finances, given the state in which the hon. Member’s party left this country. Today’s announcement makes it very clear that businesses small and large and this Government share the ambition of delivering growth for the economy. That is why we are going further, faster in pursuit of that.