Lord Mandelson

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)]

I beg to move amendment (a), at the end to add

“except papers prejudicial to UK national security or international relations.”

Members will be aware that the Government came to the House on Monday for an update following the release of 3 million pages of documents by the United States Department of Justice regarding Jeffrey Epstein. As the Government said on Monday, and as I reiterate now, Jeffrey Epstein was a convicted paedophile and a despicable individual who revelled in abusing the vulnerable and destroyed the lives of countless women and girls.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Will the right hon. Member give way?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I will complete my introductory remarks, and then I will give way to the right hon. Gentleman.

What Jeffrey Epstein did was unforgivable, and every time his crimes are in the public eye, victims must relive their trauma. His victims are at the forefront of my mind, as I am sure they are for all right hon. and hon. Members in this debate. The Prime Minister has said that anyone with relevant information must come forward and co-operate with investigations, so that Jeffrey Epstein’s victims get the justice that they have been denied for so long. As for Peter Mandelson, his decision to maintain a close relationship with a convicted paedophile, including discussing private Government business, is not just wrong, it is abhorrent.

[Stephen Flynn]

I thank the Minister for giving way. I am curious. Earlier we heard the Prime Minister state that he knew that Peter Mandelson had maintained a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Did the Minister also know, and if so, did he express any concerns to the Prime Minister at that time about his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States of America?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

On the second point, I played no personal role in the appointment process, but as the Prime Minister said, the depth and extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship was not known at the time of his appointment. As soon as that came to light, the Prime Minister acted decisively and sacked Peter Mandelson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

In this Chamber, just under three hours ago, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom made a long overdue and welcome admission. For months, he, various Labour Members, Ministers and members of the Cabinet have told us all to ignore our eyes and our ears. The Prime Minister has said that he was not aware of the relationship between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein, but today he admitted at that Dispatch Box that he did.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I can inform Members that this debate will now run until 7 pm to allow more Members to speak. Sorry for the interruption, Stephen Flynn.

[Stephen Flynn]

Four hours is plenty for me, Mr Speaker.

This is a dark and disgusting day for this Chamber and for each and every person living on these isles, because their Prime Minister admitted that he knew about the relationship. Of course he knew; in The Guardian in 2023, Rowena Mason wrote about the court documents that had been released in the United States of America, which referenced the fact that Jeffrey Epstein had maintained a relationship with two individuals prominent in British public life. Members will know them. They were Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Peter Mandelson. The Prime Minister knew, just as he knew when Jim Pickard of the Financial Times asked him in January 2024 about the relationship. He has seen the photos that each of us in this Chamber has seen of Peter Mandelson in luxury accommodation in New York alongside Jeffrey Epstein.

[Alicia Kearns]

Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

[Stephen Flynn]

I will not, I am afraid.

The Prime Minister knew that the two had a relationship, yet he ignored it. He ignored each and every victim of Jeffrey Epstein when he chose to appoint Mandelson as the ambassador to the United States of America.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

Will the right hon. Member give way?

[Stephen Flynn]

No, I will not.

Today’s debate is important because we will get to the bottom of what Peter Mandelson did—I will come to that—but also because we in this Chamber cannot forgive or forget the judgment of the Prime Minister when he chose to make that political choice. It was a choice that Labour Members have told us repeatedly was a political risk. It was not a political risk. It was a betrayal of the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, because Peter Mandelson knew when he continued the relationship that the man was a convicted sex offender.

[Dr Arthur]

Will the right hon. Member give way?

[Stephen Flynn]

I said I will not. The hon. Member can sit down and listen to my speech today, as his colleagues should have done on many occasions in months gone past.

The Prime Minister has let down not only himself but his office and the public—a public to whom he promised change. He said that he would tread lightly on their lives. Do any of the public believe that today? Do any of them have confidence in his judgment? Are the Labour party seriously saying to the public that they still have confidence in the Prime Minister’s judgment—that we can trust him to make the big decisions, when he cannot even accept that a relationship between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein should have stopped Peter Mandelson becoming the ambassador to the United States of America?

[Dr Arthur]

I thank the right hon. Member for giving way. I really do think that he is misreading the mood of the House. We are trying to find consensus on what is being debated. He talks about articles in The Guardian and what was in the public domain, but he will know that last year, John Swinney stayed in Peter Mandelson’s house in Washington. He does not always stay with ambassadors, but he chose to then. If John Swinney knew about this—it was in the public domain—why did he stay with Peter Mandelson, and why did he not answer questions on this yesterday, when he was asked them five times?

[Stephen Flynn]

What a desperate and foolish intervention. I would have let the hon. Member intervene earlier, if I had known that was coming. He knows fine well that the First Minister of Scotland does not appoint the ambassador to the United States of America. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom does. I thought that for once we had consensus in this House, and agreed that the Prime Minister lacked judgment by appointing Mandelson. [Interruption.] Does the hon. Member disagree and think that the Prime Minister should have appointed him?

[Dr Arthur]

This debate is about trying to find agreement on how the information can be released into the public domain. It is not about grandstanding for social media or making the front page of The National. We are trying to take the country forward.

[Stephen Flynn]

Yet another one—the hon. Member excels himself.

On Monday, the Prime Minister was at the Dispatch Box, and I asked him two questions. I asked him to make an unreserved apology to each and every victim of Epstein for his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson. He chose not to. I then asked him if he agreed, at that moment, that Peter Mandelson should be subject to a police investigation, because I had just reported him to the police. He chose not to agree; he said:

“Only the SNP could go about this in this way”.—[Official Report, 2 February 2026; Vol. 780, c. 34.]

Here we are, two days later, and Peter Mandelson is being investigated. Importantly, the Prime Minister has still not said sorry. That is an abdication of his responsibility, as he has had numerous occasions to apologise. It is another betrayal of those victims.

We must support this motion to ensure that the treachery of Peter Mandelson is not ignored, and to properly understand why the Prime Minister took the decision that he took. Let none of us be in any doubt: these discussions about manuscript amendments and motions, and how we decide on anything, will not matter as much to the public as the Prime Minister’s lack of judgment. That will lead to his departure from No. 10.

US Department of Justice Release of Files

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

My hon. Friend is exactly right, and that is why the Government have written to the appropriate authorities in the other place today to request that that work is now started.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

I do not understand why the Minister, whom I respect greatly, is standing there and speaking as though the Government did not know about the relationship and connection between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein prior to appointing him as the ambassador to the United States. I cannot understand why the Minister is not standing at the Dispatch Box saying that this House will sit until whatever hour required to pass legislation to strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage. I cannot understand why the Minister is acting like the Labour party has been proactive on this, when it has known for months about Peter Mandelson’s revelations and yet has allowed him to maintain a party membership throughout that time. I cannot understand why half an hour ago the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom did not just apologise for his decision making and lack of judgment and say that Peter Mandelson should be subject to a criminal investigation.

[Darren Jones]

Neither the Labour party nor the Government, or indeed this House or the right hon. Member, knew about the information that was made available by the US Department of Justice only a matter of days ago. As soon as that information became available, the Government have acted accordingly. In respect of the previous decision of the Prime Minister to sack Peter Mandelson as the ambassador to the United States, the Prime Minister was very clear with this House and, indeed, the public that he did so quickly, as soon as the extent and depth of the relationship became clear from the disclosure that took place. The Prime Minister relied on the information provided by Peter Mandelson at the time of his appointment. As soon as that information changed, the Prime Minister acted quickly and removed him from office.

China and Japan

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for all the work she does on behalf of her constituents. Yes, I raised this issue in detail and made it clear that we were calling for Jimmy Lai’s release, plus other details of his health and the situation he is being held in. I believe it is the right thing to engage at the highest level on issues of such concern and to have that conversation—I believe that is a far better strategy than putting your head in the sand, which is apparently the policy of the Conservative party.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

As you will be aware, Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister was in China and Japan, he gave comment that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should testify before Congress in the United States. What the Prime Minister chose not to do was to offer an unreserved apology to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein for appointing his other friend, Peter Mandelson, as the ambassador to the United States of America. Now that he is back from China and Japan, will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to do just that, and does he agree with me that Peter Mandelson should be subject to a police investigation for potential criminality while in public office?

[Mr Speaker]

There is a statement to come.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Carers are incredibly skilled workers. My sister is one of them, and I am very proud of them and her for their invaluable work. I am pleased that we have increased the carer’s allowance earnings limit by the largest amount since it was introduced, and we are providing £500 million to fund the first ever fair pay agreement through the Employment Rights Bill that was passed yesterday, to ensure that care workers are properly recognised and rewarded.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

It is indeed the season of good will, so with that in mind, I do not intend to ask the Prime Minister about his broken promises on energy bills, the 1,000 jobs being lost in the North sea, or the fact that Peter Mandelson is still a Member of the House of Lords. I will not even ask the Prime Minister about the chaos that is engulfing the Labour party, his Budget or his own leadership. I simply want to wish him a happy Christmas. How does he intend to spend his final one in Downing Street?

[The Prime Minister]

I am going to get an update from the Chancellor on Grangemouth in just a minute. The right hon. Gentleman is clearly not interested in Grangemouth. I would have thought, on a day like this, that he would want to welcome the £120 million investment into Grangemouth. It is a landmark investment protecting 500 jobs there and hundreds more across Scotland’s supply chain, and he cannot even bring himself to mention it. That is on top of the Typhoon defence jobs in Edinburgh and the shipbuilding jobs on the Clyde. After decades of SNP rule, its Members are totally out of ideas and they cannot even welcome the Grangemouth news. Scotland deserves change next year with Anas Sarwar.

G20 and Ukraine

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

I think it is important to begin by stating that those on the far right who parrot the views of Putin, and those on the far left who seek to undermine NATO, are no friends of Ukraine. I was pleased to hear in the Prime Minister’s statement his unequivocal approach to responsibility in this regard—he rightly pinned it on one person: Vladimir Putin. The Prime Minister did, however, equivocate in response to the Leader of the Opposition with regard to the G8. Kaja Kallas of the European Union was very clear in her comments this morning that Russia cannot be in the G8—she said, “definitely not”. Surely he agrees?

[The Prime Minister]

Russia is the aggressor here. Obviously these are questions for the G7 to determine, but I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that the focus is very much on the process at the moment, which is to get a ceasefire and an end to this conflict.

I join the right hon. Gentleman in his point about those on the left. The Green party, of course, says that we should pull out of NATO—at a moment like this. It also says that it would make renting out a property—landlords—unlawful, but make selling drugs lawful, outside the school gate. I have to say, I find that a little odd.

Middle East

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue. There are concerning reports of what gangs are getting up to. The immediate next steps need to be, on the one hand, getting aid into Gaza and, on the other, getting better security arrangements in Gaza. That has to come in two stages. The stabilisation force will take some time, but immediate steps are needed to stabilise the situation now.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

I begin by expressing relief at the release of the hostages, but anger that so many have not lived to see this day, and relief that Palestinians are not sheltering from the skies today, but anger that so many are doing so without friends and family by their sides and without homes to return to. As we all embrace that collective relief, let us not forget that access to aid is essential. Access for the world’s media and investigators to document crimes against humanity is essential. A two-state solution is essential. Accountability is essential. With those words in mind, I say to the Prime Minister what I said to his predecessor two years ago: history will judge us by our response and by our actions. Up until now, on too many occasions we have failed. Let us not do so any more.

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that aid is the immediate issue, and I agree that the media absolutely need to be allowed in to document what has to be seen. On a two-state solution, of course there has to be accountability.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

Q2. After almost two decades of the SNP—

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Hear, hear! Ten more to come!

[Mr Speaker]

Order. If the right hon. Gentleman carries on, there won’t be 10 more decades of the SNP in this Chamber.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I have read through the details of Connor’s case, which has just been summarised. It is heartbreaking. I thank my hon. Friend for consistently campaigning and championing all those affected. I will make sure that he gets the meetings he needs so that we can hear from Connor and others and learn from their experience.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Gaza is a graveyard. Yet rather than end arms sales, extend sanctions and stand by international law, the Prime Minister will today welcome into his home—a home entrusted to him by the people of these isles—the man who called for the collective punishment of the Palestinian people and who signed the artillery shells that destroyed their homes, their families and their friends; a man who will ignore every word the Prime Minister says. Would he invite Vladimir Putin into No. 10? Would he invite Benjamin Netanyahu into No. 10? What does it say of this Prime Minister that he will harbour this man while children starve?

[The Prime Minister]

For the record, we have suspended arms that could be used in Gaza, we have sanctioned extremists and we have suspended trade talks. The point the right hon. Gentleman raises is a very serious one. We all want an outcome that ensures that there is peace, that the hostages get out, that aid gets in and that there is a two-state outcome. It is the only way we will get peace in a region that has suffered conflict for a very, very long time. I will not give up on diplomacy—that is the politics of students.

G7 and NATO Summits

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. Our intelligence services do an incredible job, and I pay tribute to them. As he will know, from now on, where the intelligence services are contributing to our national defence, that will be included in our defence spend. It will not be included in the 2.5%—that is core defence, as always understood—but will be added to it, taking it to 2.6% in 2027-28.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

It will not have escaped anyone’s notice that while the Prime Minister was rightly away at the G7 and NATO summits, he made tens of billions of pounds of unfunded spending commitments, yet next week he expects Members of Parliament to vote with him to remove money from disabled people who need help to go to the toilet. How can he justify making a moral argument for security abroad while removing security from disabled people at home?

[The Prime Minister]

As the hon. Gentleman will know, when we announced the 2.5% increase in defence spending, we made it very clear where that money was coming from, and it was not coming from welfare spend, as he very well knows. I do believe in the moral duty—and it is a moral duty—to defend our country, which means working with our NATO allies to ensure that we have the most effective deterrent. He cannot give lectures on the moral duty to protect our country while maintaining a position of casting aside the single most effective deterrent we have. That is unserious.

UK-EU Summit

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend has raised an important point about touring artists. We are absolutely committed to securing a better deal for them, and that will be part of the ongoing work as we move forward from this summit to the next.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

I think the Front Benches need to calm the jets a wee bit. This is obviously not a surrender, just as it is obviously no substitute for membership of the European Union; nor, indeed, is it, as the Prime Minister has said repeatedly today, providing “unprecedented access” to the EU market—that is simply absurd.

The deal does provide for co-operation on carbon storage, so will the Prime Minister build on that good work by committing his Government to providing the financial support that is necessary to take forward the Acorn project in the north-east of Scotland?

[The Prime Minister]

The deal does allow us to move forward on renewables and carbon capture as part of the package around renewables, which is why it is so important across the United Kingdom, but particularly in Scotland because of the potential for job opportunities there, so of course we will press on in that regard. I would gently ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider again why he should not support this deal for the benefit of the whisky sector in Scotland, and given that yesterday Salmon Scotland came out hugely in favour of it. He should stand up and support the work that we are doing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Wednesday 7th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

It is good to see a local Labour MP fighting for jobs in his constituency and achieving excellent results. We will make our final investment decision at the spending review. It is something that the Conservatives failed to deliver in 14 years. We are unashamedly pro-nuclear, pro-growth and pro-jobs. That is why we are making it easier to build small modular reactors and scrapping absurd rules that left vital projects tangled up in needless paperwork. We are doing the work that they failed to do in 14 years.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Prior to the election, the Prime Minister promised that energy bills would come down; they continue to rise. He promised that he would save the refinery at Grangemouth; it is shut. He promised that he would unleash a generation of secure energy jobs in my city of Aberdeen. Today, Harbour Energy—the largest independent player in the North sea—has announced that it is about to shed 25% of its workforce. That is 250 jobs in my constituency gone in the blink of his eye. Do you know who they blame, Mr Speaker? They blame the policies of theLabour party. May I ask the Prime Minister—in fact, may I invite him to come to Aberdeen and explain to my constituents why he is willing to move heaven and earth to save jobs in Scunthorpe, while destroying jobs in Scotland?

[The Prime Minister]

Nobody wants to see job losses, but I remind the right hon. Member that before we came into office 10 months ago, the Scottish National party Government in Holyrood, alongside the Conservative Government, did absolutely nothing for projects such as Grangemouth. We have committed £200 million to secure the future of the site; we have delivered a £100 million deal; and we are helping with the training guarantees that are needed. Like his First Minister, the right hon. Gentleman will raise anything to distract from the SNP’s disastrous record, with almost one in six Scots stuck on an NHS waiting list, poor standards and violence in Scottish schools, and more than £1 billion cut from local government. We gave the Scottish Government the biggest settlement since devolution. They have been in power for nearly two decades; they have absolutely nowhere to hide their appalling record.