Jeremy Corbyn told a panel at SXSW London that Jeffrey Epstein’s influence on British politics was “enormous” and that the technology loved by Epstein and his friends would ultimately prove “their downfall” – hours before 1,400 pages of internal government documents relating to Peter Mandelson were released as part of an unprecedented Humble Address process. Corbyn also recalled Tony Benn warning him about Mandelson when he was first appointed to senior Labour office under Neil Kinnock, and called for a full public inquiry rather than a document release alone.
Corbyn, founder of Your Party following his departure from Labour, spoke at a panel titled “Exposing Power: The Epstein Files, Censorship and the Fight for the Truth.” The panel was held at the same SXSW London festival from which US commentators Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur had been barred by the Home Office from attending, as we reported in our UK entry ban piece. The timing – a SXSW panel on power and censorship, with the government having banned two critics of Israeli policy from the festival – was pointed.
What Corbyn said
Corbyn’s central argument was that Epstein’s network represented something larger than individual criminality. “Because of his endless connections, his influence is now being felt even today,” he told the audience.
He positioned technology as a double-edged instrument: the same tools that allowed Epstein and his associates to accumulate money and influence were also producing the transparency that was now exposing them. “The technology that was so loved by Epstein and his friends, and so used by them to make so much money for themselves and control so much, is actually also their downfall.”
His conclusion was delivered as a general principle rather than a specific accusation: “The lesson is this: eventually, the rich, the famous, the oligarchs, and the entirely self-entitled do eventually fall.”
He cited two specific examples of that principle in action. Prince Andrew is currently being investigated by police over allegations of misconduct in public office and sexual offences. Peter Mandelson, whose files were released in a second 1,400-page tranche later the same day – as we reported in our Mandelson files piece – is at the centre of what has been described as an unprecedented parliamentary accountability process, with a Metropolitan Police probe ongoing.
The Tony Benn warning
Perhaps the most striking anecdote in Corbyn’s SXSW appearance concerned Mandelson’s original appointment to senior Labour office under Neil Kinnock – decades before any of the current controversy.
“Tony Benn and I were discussing it, and Tony said, ‘I don’t like that man, I don’t trust that man. I will want him watched,'” Corbyn recalled.
The specific resonance of this anecdote in the week of the Mandelson files is significant. Benn’s instinct – that Mandelson should be watched – was not based on any knowledge of the Epstein connection, which came much later, or on the specific conduct documented in the files. It was a political judgment about character and about how power operates within institutions. The files suggest it was not an unreasonable one.
The call for a public inquiry
Corbyn was clear that the document release, while significant, was insufficient. He urged the public to study the files carefully and not focus only on alleged crimes but on “the links to financial institutions, mineral resources, wars and more.”
He called for a full public inquiry rather than a Humble Address document release. His argument was that the full picture of Epstein’s influence on British political and financial life requires the kind of sustained, evidence-gathering, witness-examining process that a parliamentary procedure cannot produce. “This is a turning point of history,” he said, “which a hundred years ago we’d never have known about.”
The broader frame – oligarchy and intelligence
Murtaza Hussain, national security and foreign affairs reporter at Drop Site News, also spoke on the panel and articulated the argument that the Epstein story is primarily not about sex crimes – though those are “an extremely important part” – but about power.
“It was really a story about oligarchy – oligarchy and intelligence networks and politics,” Hussain said.
This framing contextualises what the Mandelson files actually contain beyond the personal embarrassments. As we reported in our full Mandelson files breakdown, the documents reveal an ambassador privately calling the Prime Minister “beleaguered and bereft,” dismissing a cabinet minister as having a “mid-life crisis,” and refusing to hand over his own WhatsApp messages while everyone else’s were released. The files reveal how influence operates informally – through private messages, personal relationships and the specific proximity to power that figures like Mandelson cultivate over decades.
Corbyn’s observation that Epstein’s influence “is now being felt even today” is not a claim about specific wrongdoing in specific cases. It is an observation about how networks of power function – that the relationships built over years in private do not disappear when the individuals who built them become publicly inconvenient.
Whether the document release and any further inquiry will answer that broader question is what the next months will determine. The second tranche of Mandelson files was released later the same day.
