Share this post:
Two stories about Tony Blair have hit the headlines in quick succession — both of them dating back years, neither of them containing anything new in substance, and both emerging just as the former prime minister is being tipped for a major new public role.
First, the BBC revealed that Blair met Jeffrey Epstein in Downing Street in 2002, after lobbying from Peter Mandelson.
A civil service memo from that time shows that the meeting was arranged through Mandelson, who described Epstein as a “friend of mine” and “safe” — and that Blair was briefed before the meeting took place.
It lasted less than half an hour, and Blair’s office says it was confined to a discussion about US and UK politics.
The second, from The Guardian, reports that Blair and Nick Clegg hosted a private dinner earlier this year, giving six technology company leaders access to a UK investment minister.
The event, organised under the banner of Blair’s political consultancy, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), is said to demonstrate the institute’s close relationship with big tech firms and government.
Individually, these stories are awkward but not fatal.
Never miss a Vox Political post!
Social media algorithms often hide what you want to read. If you’d like to get every article directly, here are your options:
RSS Feed – instant updates, no filters:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/get-every-vox-political-post-no-algorithms-no-blocks/
Mailing List – updates delivered to your inbox:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/join-the-vox-political-mailing-list/
Video Mailing List – updates go straight to your inbox:
https://dashboard.mailerlite.com/forms/1503041/155584006128141972/share
Discord Server – direct updates, discussion and campaigns
https://discord.gg/SMCRE39XGm
Telegram Channel – every post, direct to your phone:
https://t.co/be9EMGHXFV
Support Vox Political!
With social media algorithms acting as gatekeepers – allowing users to read only what their owners want them to, sites like Vox Political need the support of our readers like never before.
You can help by making a donation:
https://Ko-fi.com/voxpolitical
The Epstein meeting happened six years before his first conviction, and there is no suggestion of further contact.
The tech dinner appears to have been a policy discussion, not a cash-for-access scandal.
But taken together, they create a narrative: Tony Blair as the power-broker, the fixer, the man who moves among the rich and connected, now resurfacing at a moment when the world is considering handing him another significant position — overseeing the administration of post-war Gaza.
That’s the real context. The timing of these stories isn’t coincidental. They arrive precisely when Blair is being talked about as the figure who might lead an international effort to rebuild Gaza, with the backing of the United Kingdom, the United States, and several Middle Eastern states. Suddenly, two decades-old documents and a dinner invitation are presented as revelations of “character”.
Why now?
Because this is how political reputations are managed — and destroyed — in the modern information economy.
Somebody, somewhere, has been sitting on this material for years.
The Epstein memo was written in May 2002. It has existed, in government archives, ever since. It was only released under the Freedom of Information Act after the sacking of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the United States, and after Blair’s possible Gaza appointment began to be discussed publicly.
If these revelations were genuinely about justice, accountability or transparency, why weren’t they published years ago — when the information might have had real relevance to the public interest, or while Blair’s consultancy dealings were shaping British and international policy?
The answer is obvious.
The timing was political.
Someone wanted to damage Blair now, not then.
That’s not transparency.
That’s weaponised disclosure — the selective release of long-held information to serve a political purpose.
The danger here isn’t that a politician is being exposed.
It’s that the system of accountability itself is being abused.
Transparency is supposed to serve democracy, not to be used as a tactical bomb to detonate under a public figure when it suits the powerful.
If the people who sat on these documents for 23 years truly believed they revealed something dangerous or improper, they had every opportunity to raise it earlier.
By keeping it secret until the political moment demanded it, they became part of the story themselves.
Who made the decision to release the memo now? Who decided to green-light a Freedom of Information request that had previously been blocked “for reasons of UK-US relations”? Who passed the details to journalists, knowing how they would be used?
Those are the questions the public deserves to have answered — because what’s at stake here isn’t just Tony Blair’s reputation, but the integrity of the processes by which our government handles information.
Blair’s critics will, of course, say that the timing doesn’t matter — that the facts speak for themselves.
But facts released at a moment chosen for maximum political damage don’t speak freely; they’re made to perform.
It is perfectly fair to debate whether Blair is fit to take on another powerful role in international affairs. This Writer is no fan of the man; I tend to agree with Margaret Thatcher’s claim that he – and his New Labour project – were her greatest achievement. He made Labour a mockery of the intentions that founded it.
It is also fair to ask why a man whose political career ended nearly two decades ago still commands so much influence through his institute and personal networks.
But it is not fair — and certainly not democratic — to pretend that sudden, conveniently timed “discoveries” are acts of justice.
If anything, those who have hoarded these documents and chosen to deploy them now have some explaining to do.
If knowledge is power, then the people choosing when to release it are exercising power too — without accountability, and without scrutiny.
That’s the real scandal.
Share this post:
Like this:
Like Loading...
Who’s trying to stop Tony Blair — and why now?
Share this post:
Two stories about Tony Blair have hit the headlines in quick succession — both of them dating back years, neither of them containing anything new in substance, and both emerging just as the former prime minister is being tipped for a major new public role.
First, the BBC revealed that Blair met Jeffrey Epstein in Downing Street in 2002, after lobbying from Peter Mandelson.
A civil service memo from that time shows that the meeting was arranged through Mandelson, who described Epstein as a “friend of mine” and “safe” — and that Blair was briefed before the meeting took place.
It lasted less than half an hour, and Blair’s office says it was confined to a discussion about US and UK politics.
The second, from The Guardian, reports that Blair and Nick Clegg hosted a private dinner earlier this year, giving six technology company leaders access to a UK investment minister.
The event, organised under the banner of Blair’s political consultancy, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), is said to demonstrate the institute’s close relationship with big tech firms and government.
Individually, these stories are awkward but not fatal.
Never miss a Vox Political post!
Social media algorithms often hide what you want to read. If you’d like to get every article directly, here are your options:
RSS Feed – instant updates, no filters:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/get-every-vox-political-post-no-algorithms-no-blocks/
Mailing List – updates delivered to your inbox:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/join-the-vox-political-mailing-list/
Video Mailing List – updates go straight to your inbox:
https://dashboard.mailerlite.com/forms/1503041/155584006128141972/share
Discord Server – direct updates, discussion and campaigns
https://discord.gg/SMCRE39XGm
Telegram Channel – every post, direct to your phone:
https://t.co/be9EMGHXFV
Support Vox Political!
With social media algorithms acting as gatekeepers – allowing users to read only what their owners want them to, sites like Vox Political need the support of our readers like never before.
You can help by making a donation:
https://Ko-fi.com/voxpolitical
The Epstein meeting happened six years before his first conviction, and there is no suggestion of further contact.
The tech dinner appears to have been a policy discussion, not a cash-for-access scandal.
But taken together, they create a narrative: Tony Blair as the power-broker, the fixer, the man who moves among the rich and connected, now resurfacing at a moment when the world is considering handing him another significant position — overseeing the administration of post-war Gaza.
That’s the real context. The timing of these stories isn’t coincidental. They arrive precisely when Blair is being talked about as the figure who might lead an international effort to rebuild Gaza, with the backing of the United Kingdom, the United States, and several Middle Eastern states. Suddenly, two decades-old documents and a dinner invitation are presented as revelations of “character”.
Why now?
Because this is how political reputations are managed — and destroyed — in the modern information economy.
Somebody, somewhere, has been sitting on this material for years.
The Epstein memo was written in May 2002. It has existed, in government archives, ever since. It was only released under the Freedom of Information Act after the sacking of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the United States, and after Blair’s possible Gaza appointment began to be discussed publicly.
If these revelations were genuinely about justice, accountability or transparency, why weren’t they published years ago — when the information might have had real relevance to the public interest, or while Blair’s consultancy dealings were shaping British and international policy?
The answer is obvious.
The timing was political.
Someone wanted to damage Blair now, not then.
That’s not transparency.
That’s weaponised disclosure — the selective release of long-held information to serve a political purpose.
The danger here isn’t that a politician is being exposed.
It’s that the system of accountability itself is being abused.
Transparency is supposed to serve democracy, not to be used as a tactical bomb to detonate under a public figure when it suits the powerful.
If the people who sat on these documents for 23 years truly believed they revealed something dangerous or improper, they had every opportunity to raise it earlier.
By keeping it secret until the political moment demanded it, they became part of the story themselves.
Who made the decision to release the memo now? Who decided to green-light a Freedom of Information request that had previously been blocked “for reasons of UK-US relations”? Who passed the details to journalists, knowing how they would be used?
Those are the questions the public deserves to have answered — because what’s at stake here isn’t just Tony Blair’s reputation, but the integrity of the processes by which our government handles information.
Blair’s critics will, of course, say that the timing doesn’t matter — that the facts speak for themselves.
But facts released at a moment chosen for maximum political damage don’t speak freely; they’re made to perform.
It is perfectly fair to debate whether Blair is fit to take on another powerful role in international affairs. This Writer is no fan of the man; I tend to agree with Margaret Thatcher’s claim that he – and his New Labour project – were her greatest achievement. He made Labour a mockery of the intentions that founded it.
It is also fair to ask why a man whose political career ended nearly two decades ago still commands so much influence through his institute and personal networks.
But it is not fair — and certainly not democratic — to pretend that sudden, conveniently timed “discoveries” are acts of justice.
If anything, those who have hoarded these documents and chosen to deploy them now have some explaining to do.
If knowledge is power, then the people choosing when to release it are exercising power too — without accountability, and without scrutiny.
That’s the real scandal.
Share this post:
Like this:
you might also like
Let’s start the New Year with some hopeful news
Like this:
More mistakes in the script? Correcting Cameron’s New Year speech
Like this:
The lies that smashed the unions and destroyed our coal industry
Like this:
Like this: