Labour Government wants to remove Lord Mandelson's peerage

[LoopyCrown3]

Labour Government wants to put forward legislation to remove Lord Mandelson's Life peerage. 

From BBC News

Government drafting legislation that would strip Mandelson's peerage

Downing Street says officials are drafting legislation that would allow Mandelson's peerage to be removed "as quickly as possible".

But it says there is also a broader need for the House of Lords to be able to swiftly remove "transgressors".

It's likely the legislation will set out a mechanism for Peerage removal not just for Lord Mandelson but for any Peer. 

Not sure how they are going to do it if Peerages are property removing them without the person being convicted of a crime may be a problem. 

Also if the Peerage is inheritable depriving heirs could also be an issue. Will there be a mechanism for heirs to be restored, when the Peer that had them were removed passes away. 

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Is this in relation to Epstein?

If so, then why wouldn't they be drafting similar legislation to officially strip the York and related peerages?

Thanks.

Brooke

[marquess]

No peer has yet been convicted of a crime in a court of law yet over this Epstein business. The latter needs to happen first before any peerages are removed. 

[Jonathan]

It's not merely due to Mandelson knowing Epstein, but more the latest revelations that he shared confidential internal government information with him.

While I'm no fan of Mandelson, I feel this is at very least premature. He has now resigned from the House of Lords. While the accusations could, if proved, result in criminal charges, there are peers who have been jailed for serious crimes who are still peers and, in at least one instance I can think of, still a member of the House. 

[S. S.]

Well, looks like another Pandora's box is going to be opened for peerages. I wonder what method they would come up with removing peerages and whether this would extent to any peerage, not just a life peerage. 

Loopycrown3 raises a good question, if you "removed" a person's peerage, what happens to the heirs? Is that peerage merely gone forever or "suspended" for that person's lifetime? Lots of implications. 

S.S.

[LoopyCrown3]

Possible Peerages up for removal based on convictions or serious scandals. Both the Duke of Marlborough and  Lord Brocket are currently facing serious charges, Marlborough is due to go to trial this week and Brocket on the 1 November 2027.

Duke of York
Duke of Marlborough

Lord Mandelson
Baroness Mone
Lord Ahmed of Rotherham
Lord Archer of Weston-super-Mare
Lord Taylor of Warwick
Lord Black of Crossharbour
Duke of Manchester
Viscount St Davids
Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
Lord Brocket

Another question would be if an Heir was convicted of a crime or deemed unacceptable would they still get the Peerage or would they be banned from inheriting. How would that affected their children claim. Say if they were passed over and the title went to the next in line, then the person passed over has a heir do they lose out or does the new peer lose the peerage to the heir of the passed over person.   

[Paul Theroff]

The fact that there was never a way to remove Jeffrey Archer's peerage shows that some procedure is needed. My impression is that he was a serial and habitual liar, but continues to be a "Lord".

There seems to be little reason to mess with hereditary peerages now that the last of their political rights and privileges has been removed. (Prince Andrew as a member of the Royal Family may be a special case, though.)

[marquess]

If the legislation is confined to just Life Peerages if would be a lot easier to deal with. 

[LoopyCrown3]

I wonder if removing someone's Life peerage will mean that the children of the peer who are styled The Hon. would lose that styling.

[malcolm davies]

This is what I posted on 21 November 2025:-

"Viscount Stansgate: [HL11683] To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to bring legislation before Parliament to give effect to the decision of the King to remove all titles from Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. 

Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent: Following the statement made by Buckingham Palace on 30 October, the entitlement to the title of ‘Prince’ and the style of ‘Royal Highness’ has been removed by Letters Patent. The title of the Duke of York has been removed from the Roll of the Peerage and will no longer be used officially. There is therefore no need for legislation to implement the measures that have been announced. Counsellors of State Act 2022 

Viscount Stansgate: [HL11567] To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to amend the Counsellors of State Act 2022. 

Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent: The Counsellors of State Act 2022 added two additional Members of the Royal Family to the list of those eligible to act as Counsellors of State in order to provide greater resilience in this aspect of our constitutional arrangements. In practice, reflecting a commitment made during the passage of the Act, only working Members of the Royal Family are called upon to act as Counsellors of State. The Government has no plans to amend the Counsellors of State Act 2022. Titles Deprivation Act 1917 

Viscount Stansgate: [HL11566] To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to amend the Titles Deprivation Act 1917. 

Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent: The Titles Deprivation Act 1917 authorised enemies of the United Kingdom to be deprived of their peerages during the First World War. The Government has no plans to amend the Titles Deprivation Act 1917

  If Lord Mandelson was to be deprived of his  peerage,an amendment to the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 would be necessary or a new act of parliament.As a peerage,even a life one, is a piece of property, it can only be done by act of parliament.

  Preparing such legislation would be difficult-what are the grounds for removal.Why should anyone be deprived when they has not been subject to a conviction?That is not to say it cannot be done-it was done in the case of George Nevill who was created Duke of Bedford in anticipation of his marriage to Elizabeth of York which did not occur as a result of the Battle of Bosworth.It was done ostensibly because he lacked the resources to maintain the dignity.

  I can't see any legislation having an easy passage in the House of Lords-which peer in their right mind would vote for something that may be used against them?

  There is also the consideration that Lord Mandelson no doubt possesses information which the Government would like to conceal.

  One option is to amend the royal warrant relating to the peerage roll which would allow his name to be removed-but that does not end his peerage.It would also damage the purpose of keeping the Roll.

  The other option is to prevent him from sitting-this is the most likely course.

 

  LoopyCrown3-in the past an attainder prevented heirs and other children from styling themselves as such as attainder was the corruption of the blood of the person attainted and this include his issue.If an heir was attainted his issue lost their rights as well.Attainder was permanent unless the judgment causing attainder was reversed or the Parliament reversed it.An example is the Duke of Buccleuch who although the lineal descendant of the Duke of Monmouth was never granted a reversal of his attainder as a duke.

[LoopyCrown3]

Lord Mandelson has retired from the House of Lords as of today. 

Today Starmer says his team will draft legislation to strip Mandelson of his title and this morning he agreed with the King that Mandelson should also be removed from the list of those in the Privy Council.

So looks like they are not going down the remove him from the roll of peerage route like for the Duke of York. 

[LoopyCrown3]

Not sure why but my post has got deleted, In it I was updating that Lord Mandelson has retired from the Lords today. Also Starmer has told the Commons that he wants legislation to remove his Peerage and has spoken to the King to remove him from the Privy Council.

On Wednesday, 4 February 2026 at 07:28:41 UTC malcolm davies wrote:

[John Horton (staff)]

The children of a peer whose title is extinct do not lose their courtesy titles. Well known example: Lady Camilla Dempster (nee Osborne), daughter of the 11th Duke of Leeds (extinct in 1964 on the death of the 12th Duke). 

Someone would have to decide whether a peerage that has been revoked either existed and has subsequently been cancelled or never deemed to have existed at all. 

---

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com <peerag...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of LoopyCrown3 <muffin...@hotmail.co.uk>
Sent: 03 February 2026 9:59 PM
To: Peerage News <peerag...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Labour Government wants to remove Lord Mandelson's peerage

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peerage-news/1456efb3-e037-4459-b712-a7b9f588208an%40googlegroups.com.

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored where permitted by law.

[Paul Theroff]

A more analogous example would be children of attainted peers. It would be tedious to pore through allthe attainted titles and work out for sure whether their children continued to use their courtesy titles, but I think they usually did.

Here is one example:

Walpole wrote to Anne Pitt 8 Oct 1765 about receiving a letter from "Lady Frances Erskine".

He refers to Frances, d.1776, dau of the Earl of Mar attainted 1716; she m.1740 her cousin James Erskine.

Another analogous case would be the children of Sir Alec Douglas-Home. I believe that his daughters continued to use "Lady" even after their father renounced his Earldom.

[BREMENMURRAY]

The Duke of Marlborough does not go on trial until January 2028

[malcolm davies]

Paul,

        Attainder involves corruption of the blood ie not only are all the civil rights of the attaindee abolished but those whose right depends on transmission through the attaindee lose those rights as well.Thus the Earl of Mar's estates were forfeited to the Crown in 1716.

  As the right of use of the courtesy title Lady derived from her status as a daughter of the 23rd Earl,she should not have been using it in relation to that title.However the 23rd Earl was also Earl of Mar and Duke of Mar in the Jacobite peerage,so it is possible that Walpole was extending the courtesy style to her on the basis of that peerage.

  The example of Sir Alec Douglas- Home is not apposite-s3 of the Peerage Act 1963 provides that the devolution of the peerage on the death of the disclaimed peer is not affected.

[Paul Theroff]

I take your points, but I think it was a pretty standard usage. Cokayne calls her "Lady Frances Erskine" in the Mar article in Complete Peerage. Referring to her son, he says "...suc to the family estate of Alloa, on the death of his mother, Lady Frances Erskine..." I don't know her date of birth, but she possibly wasn't even born before her father was attainted, since her parents married only in 1714.

[Paul Theroff]

On the other hand, the announcement of her death in Gentleman's Magazine calls her "Mrs. Frances Erskine", so it was not universal to call her "Lady".

[LoopyCrown3]

Here is the BBC article about the Duke of Marlborough in court today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rm7v0zr24o

[Paul Theroff]

I was looking to see whather other contemporary sources called her "Lady Frances" and came upon a court case from 1772 entitled "Robertson, Pearson, and Mitchell, Heritors in the Parish of Logie, v. Lady Frances Erskine of Marr, and her husband".

Unfortunately one cannot read the actual court papers without a membership, but it is here:

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff80e60d03e7f57eb8f9b

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Lord Mandelson is listed as "retired on 4 February 2026" on the House of Lords' website.

Brooke