The release of 1500 pages of documents related to the Peter Mandelson affair has sparked a debate about privacy in government. Simon Jenkins argues that the principle underlying the disclosure is that officials are always 'on the record', but leaders must be able to speak their minds freely.
Leaked Communications
Among the revelations, a Cabinet Office minister, Darren Jones, commiserated with Mandelson over his dismissal as ambassador to Washington, saying he was 'so sorry'. This sympathy was not part of the official 1500-page release but was leaked from within Jones's own department. Similarly, Keir Starmer's WhatsApp communications were revealed to be subject to an auto-delete function, erasing his thoughts and intentions hour by hour. Critics argue this is an outrage against public accountability.
The Cost of Inquiries
The Mandelson saga exemplifies inquiry-itis gone mad, with millions of pounds spent on investigations that should have gone to victims of the Windrush, Grenfell, and Post Office scandals. The Covid inquiry alone has cost over £200 million, a sum Jenkins calls inexcusable, especially given that other European countries completed similar exercises in months.
While Mandelson's friendship with Jeffrey Epstein might have merited a minor investigation, the Tories forced a 'humble address' to compel disclosure of all relevant documents. The government responded with a barrage of communications on all subjects except those prejudicial to national security or international relations, which were the core of the dispute.
Impact on Government Business
Jenkins warns that these disclosures have a deadening impact on the conduct of government business. The revelation that the prime minister uses WhatsApp and auto-delete is not sensational, but the release of Mandelson's private dealings and opinions while in post is damaging. The world now knows the frank views of senior British officials on the Trump regime, private reactions to domestic politics, opinions of their own leader, and ambitions of colleagues. These are matters of gossip, not public interest.
The Need for Private Zones
Drawing parallels with the Snowden and Assange revelations, Jenkins notes that media outlets once applied a 'public interest' test to disclosures. Now, the digital realm is inherently insecure, and no communication is truly safe. People working in government must have private zones for free argument and deliberation. Ambassadors must be able to pass confidential judgments to ministers, and ministers must have a forum to express doubts without public reprisal. Without such privacy, debate is stifled, and government becomes inefficient and fearful.
The principle underlying the Mandelson 1500-pager is that all involved in government should be 'on the record' for their utterances, wherever they occur. This cannot foster worthwhile debate or efficient government, only a stifled and frightened one.
