The tremors from the Jeffrey Epstein files are reaching deep into the corridors of power, forcing a high-profile resignation from a lobbying firm co-founded by a former Labour minister. Benjamin Wegg-Prosser, the chief executive of Global Counsel, has stepped down with immediate effect. This dramatic exit, triggered by revelations linking him and the firm to the convicted sex offender, raises urgent questions not just about individual accountability, but about the very fabric of influence and transparency in the world of political lobbying. Can such a storm ever truly be weathered by a simple change of leadership, or is this merely a convenient exit from a deeply uncomfortable situation?
The Unraveling Threads: Mandelson, Epstein, and Global Counsel
The story of Global Counsel's crisis is inextricably linked to Peter Mandelson, a prominent figure in the Labour Party and a former cabinet minister. Founded in 2010 with Benjamin Wegg-Prosser after Labour's general election defeat, Global Counsel quickly established itself as a significant player in the lobbying landscape. The firm boasts an impressive roster of clients, including major financial institutions like Barclays, tech giants like OpenAI, and influential global brands such as Shein and TikTok. Its chairman, Archie Norman, also holds the position of chairman at Marks & Spencer.
Read More: Trump Disagrees with Federalist Society, Judge Stops His Courtroom Talk
However, the firm's association with Mandelson, and more specifically, his long-standing, albeit now publicly acknowledged, connection with Jeffrey Epstein, has cast a long shadow. Recent revelations from the unsealed Epstein files have intensified scrutiny.
Mandelson's Departure: It is now confirmed that Peter Mandelson no longer holds any stake or influence in Global Counsel. His 21% shareholding has been fully divested, a process that was reportedly initiated following the intensifying controversy. This move, announced by Chairman Archie Norman, signals a definitive cut of ties, with Norman stating, "Peter Mandelson no longer has any shareholding, role or association with Global Counsel and has no influence over the firm in any capacity."
Wegg-Prosser's Exit: Following closely, Benjamin Wegg-Prosser has resigned as chief executive. He stated his decision was driven by the completion of Mandelson's stake divestment, feeling it was "time to draw a line."
Client Fallout: The Epstein revelations have had a tangible impact on Global Counsel's business. Clients have reportedly begun to sever or reconsider their ties, with Barclays understood to have cut its relationship with the firm amid the ongoing scrutiny. This client exodus underscores the reputational damage incurred.
Epstein's Early Role: Disturbingly, reports suggest Jeffrey Epstein played an "integral role in the agency's infancy." Wegg-Prosser himself is reported to have been in "semi-regular contact" with Epstein, even after Epstein's conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
Read More: UK Economy Grew a Little at End of 2025
"With the completion of the divestment of Peter Mandelson’s stake in the business, I feel that now is the time to draw a line between Global Counsel and his actions." - Benjamin Wegg-Prosser, former CEO of Global Counsel
This sequence of events points to a firm in crisis, attempting to staunch the bleeding by severing ties with its controversial co-founder and its now-former CEO. But does this truly address the underlying issues?
The Ghost of Epstein's Network
The Epstein files have ripped open a Pandora's Box, revealing the intricate web of powerful individuals who associated with the convicted sex offender. The latest releases have not only implicated high-profile figures but have also shed light on the lengths to which Epstein went to cultivate and maintain his influential network.
A Pattern of Association: The files detail how Epstein seemingly served the "wants and needs" of the wealthy and powerful, creating an environment where his social network flourished despite his criminal convictions.
Government Ties: There are concerning indications of connections to individuals in government. Emails reportedly show a former UK minister asking Epstein for advice on winning political and corporate clients. Furthermore, Prince Andrew has been mentioned in connection with attempting to encourage business dealings with Epstein, and aides of his are reported to have worked with Epstein on potential agreements.
Intelligence Sharing: One of the most alarming revelations is the suggestion that a peer provided Epstein with sensitive UK government information while serving as a minister. Another report indicates a former UK business secretary used talking points in conversations with a US official about financial crisis measures that were reportedly provided by Epstein.
Media Management: Even media inquiries and career advancement for prominent figures were apparently facilitated by Epstein, with a bank's general counsel seeking his help and advice on press enquiries.
Read More: Lawmakers Question Attorney General Bondi on Epstein Files
"Recently released files show how the sex offender built his vast social network." - Financial Times
These details paint a grim picture of Epstein's influence, suggesting a willingness among some powerful individuals to engage with him, regardless of his crimes, for personal or professional gain. The question remains: how deeply were these networks embedded, and who else benefited from these unsavoury connections?
The Lobbying Industry: A Shadowy Realm?
Global Counsel's predicament is not an isolated incident but shines a spotlight on the broader lobbying industry. The practice of influencing policy and decision-making is essential in a democracy, but the opaque nature of lobbying can, and often does, blur the lines between legitimate advocacy and undue influence.
The Role of Lobbyists: Lobbying firms act as intermediaries, representing clients' interests to governments and policymakers. They leverage their networks, expertise, and understanding of the political landscape to shape legislation and regulation.
Transparency Concerns: While lobbying is a legal activity, there are persistent concerns about the transparency of these relationships. Who are the clients? What are their objectives? And what are the ethical boundaries of these engagements?
The Mandelson Factor: Peter Mandelson's career trajectory, moving from high-level government roles to a lucrative career in lobbying, highlights the revolving door between politics and the private sector. This can create potential conflicts of interest and raise questions about whether individuals are leveraging their past access and influence for personal gain.
Reputational Risk: The Epstein scandal serves as a stark reminder of the reputational risks associated with powerful figures who operate in these spaces. The association, even indirectly, can be devastating.
Regulation and Oversight: Questions must be asked about the effectiveness of current regulations governing lobbying in the UK and elsewhere. Are they robust enough to prevent the kind of reputational damage and potential ethical breaches we are now witnessing?
Read More: Sir Jim Ratcliffe Says Sorry for Immigration Comments
"The episode has also shone fresh light on Global Counsel and standards in the wider lobbying industry." - City AM
This crisis at Global Counsel forces us to ask: how do we ensure that lobbying serves the public interest, rather than simply furthering the agendas of those with the deepest pockets or the most well-connected associates?
Wegg-Prosser's Exit: A Swift Escape or a Necessary Reckoning?
Benjamin Wegg-Prosser's immediate resignation as CEO of Global Counsel, coinciding with the finalization of Peter Mandelson's divestment from the firm, presents a neat narrative of damage control. However, critical questions linger about the extent of his personal involvement and the timing of his departure.
Personal Communications: Wegg-Prosser himself reportedly emailed Jeffrey Epstein on at least one occasion. Crucially, one such email was sent while Global Counsel was preparing a statement about Mandelson's links to Epstein. This suggests a level of engagement and awareness of the unfolding controversy.
Meeting Mandelson Suggested: Sources close to Wegg-Prosser state he met Epstein only once, 16 years ago, and that this meeting was suggested by Peter Mandelson. While this could be interpreted as a brief, albeit ill-advised, interaction, it still places Wegg-Prosser directly within the orbit of Epstein's influence, initiated by Mandelson.
The "Line" Drawn: Wegg-Prosser’s justification for stepping down – "to draw a line" – implies that Mandelson’s actions were the sole problem. But what about his own reported interactions? Was his contact with Epstein purely incidental, or did it serve a purpose for Global Counsel or Mandelson at the time?
Corporate Responsibility: As CEO, Wegg-Prosser was ultimately responsible for the firm's operations and reputation. The claim that Epstein played an "integral role in the agency's infancy" raises serious doubts about the ethical compass of the firm's leadership during its formative years, under his watch.
Read More: Congress Leader Accuses Finance Minister of Lying to Parliament About WTO Deal
| Fact of Contact | Source Suggestion | Wegg-Prosser's Role |
|---|---|---|
| One meeting (25 mins, 16 years ago) | Suggested by Peter Mandelson | Attended |
| Direct email to Epstein | Wegg-Prosser sent | Sent draft statement about Mandelson’s links |
| Semi-regular contact | Revealed by City AM | Involved after Epstein's conviction |
"Sources close to Wegg-Prosser say he met Epstein once 16 years ago for 25 minutes at the suggestion of Mandelson." - The Guardian
The swiftness of Wegg-Prosser's resignation, coupled with his explanation, feels designed to contain the scandal. But has he truly been held accountable for his own role in maintaining contact with Epstein and for the firm's early entanglement with the financier?
Who Holds the Levers?
The crisis engulfing Global Counsel is a stark reminder of the intricate dance between politics, business, and influence. As Benjamin Wegg-Prosser steps down and Peter Mandelson severs his ties, the critical question is: who is truly accountable for the ethical compromises that allowed such a situation to fester?
Read More: Arc Raiders Game Sells 14 Million Copies, Much More Than Expected
Client Scrutiny: Barclays and other major clients now face their own reckoning. Did their due diligence fail? What measures will they implement to prevent similar reputational damage in the future?
The Board's Role: Archie Norman, as chairman, has overseen the divestment and Wegg-Prosser's exit. What was the board's awareness of these relationships, and what actions did they take, or fail to take, prior to the Epstein revelations becoming public?
Political Oversight: Given Mandelson's significant political background, questions must extend to the wider political establishment. Were there any checks or balances on his post-political activities that might have flagged these associations earlier?
Regulatory Gaps: The revelations expose potential gaps in the regulation and oversight of the lobbying industry. Is the current framework sufficient to ensure transparency and prevent conflicts of interest arising from associations with individuals like Epstein?
Media Responsibility: The media, through investigative journalism like that of the Financial Times, The Guardian, and City AM, has played a crucial role in exposing these links. But how can media outlets continue to hold power to account without being susceptible to similar pressures or criticisms?
"With the completion of this process today, Peter Mandelson no longer has any shareholding, role or association with Global Counsel and has no influence over the firm in any capacity." - Archie Norman, Chairman of Global Counsel
Read More: Keir Starmer Faces Questions After Top Civil Servant Leaves and Controversial Appointments
The departure of Wegg-Prosser is a significant event, but it risks being a superficial solution to a deeper problem. Without a thorough and transparent investigation into the firm's past dealings, the extent of Epstein's involvement, and the accountability of all individuals involved – including Wegg-Prosser himself and the board – this resignation may only be the beginning of a longer, more uncomfortable reckoning for the lobbying industry and those who operate within it. The Epstein files have not just exposed a financier's network; they have revealed the potentially compromised ethical foundations of institutions that wield significant influence in our society.
Sources:
The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/06/ben-wegg-prosser-boss-lobbying-firm-peter-mandelson-quits-jeffrey-epstein-revelations
The Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/peter-mandelson-archie-norman-labour-london-barclays-b2915344.html
City AM: https://www.cityam.com/boss-of-mandelsons-global-counsel-quits-amid-epstein-file-fallout/
Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/888924ac-a73d-4163-9f4d-b193c1dd6247
Associated News Agency: https://associatednewsagency.com/2025/09/14/global-counsel-cuts-ties-with-peter-mandelson-amid-epstein-revelations/
Financial Times (Epstein Files): https://www.ft.com/epstein-files
The Guardian (Sept 12, 2025): https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/12/peter-mandelson-advisory-firm-global-counsel-cuts-ties-amid-jeffrey-epstein-revelations
Read More: Sir Jim Ratcliffe Says Sorry for Immigration Words
