Peter and the wolves: Mandelson falls but Epstein scandal spreads

0:03Peter Mandelson: The Economist.

0:10Peter Mandelson: Hello and welcome to The Intelligence from The Economist. I'm Jason Palmer. And I'm Rosie Bloor. Every weekday we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.

0:25Peter Mandelson: love it or hate it and really a lot of people with any opinion at all hate it ryanair is a low-cost airline success story we ask how it's gained such a lead over its competitors even though it never much focused on treating customers well and the natural world provides many examples of homosexual behavior but what characteristics connect the different animals or their communities that display it? The answer suggests that it's not about fun or pleasure. It's for survival.

1:01Peter Mandelson: But first...

1:08Peter Mandelson: The fallout from the latest Jeffrey Epstein file release is continuing, not least in Britain. It's raised further difficult questions for the former Prince Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson. But the greatest odium has been heaped on a totem of Britain's Labour Party, as one of the biggest political scandals of recent decades now unfolds. After about three decades of being one of the most influential people in politics, Peter Mendelsohn's career now finally appears to be completely over. After pretty shocking emails he sent to Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire paedophile financier emerged. Duncan Robinson is our Britain political editor.

1:54Peter Mandelson: He faces potential criminal investigations and the fallout for Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, is only just beginning. Duncan, you talk about him as a huge figure in British politics. For those who don't know Peter Mandelson as well, tell me about what role he's played. Peter Mandelson was one of the architects of New Labour, so the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown government that dominated British politics for 13 years. But he was always a very controversial figure. So even at that time, he lost one job over an undeclared loan. He lost another job over a nefarious passport scandal. It should be noted that Peter Mandelson was technically cleared of any wrongdoing over the passport scandal.

2:37Peter Mandelson: But each time he was sort of welcomed back into the fold. People knew that he had these flaws, but they knew that he also had these abilities that they seemed to think that they couldn't do without. And the latest person to fall foul of this was Keir Starmer, who brought Peter Mandelson back in as the British ambassador to America. And that was quite unusual because they don't normally let political quote-unquote appointees become senior ambassadors. It's normally career diplomats, so that was a relatively strange and controversial decision when they made it. And what do we now know about Mandelson's involvement with Jeffrey Epstein?

3:13Peter Mandelson: We knew a little bit about their relationship before. There were photographs of them together. Peter Mandelson had talked about how he regretted ever having known Jeffrey Epstein. But what's changed in the past few weeks and months is the depth of that relationship. There are thousands of emails, often using quite sort of affectionate, peculiar language between them both, it was clearly a very close relationship. There seems to be the allegation that Jeffrey Epstein was paying Peter Mandelson's partner, now husband, to do an osteopath course. And this is tens of thousands of dollars. So it's very peculiar indeed.

3:45Peter Mandelson: And we should say that Peter Mandelson denies doing anything wrong throughout this entire process. And it's the new release of documents that's really changed the picture, right? The latest releases were extremely surreal. There's one picture of Peter Mandelson in his underpants chatting to a woman. It's a very, very undignified situation. But the most shocking thing has been that Peter Mandelson was often sending Jeffrey Epstein confidential secret memos meant to be sent to the Prime Minister or being forwarded to effectively Peter Mandelson's billionaire mate. And that is the part that's really, really shocked people in Westminster.

4:19Peter Mandelson: It's remarkable to have a very senior member of government. Peter Mandelson was probably the number two or number three most important person in the country at that point, sending private information to his friends. It is a remarkable scandal. Duncan, as you say, Mandelson was appointed as Britain's ambassador to the US, even though his links with Epstein were known. How was that possible? So Peter Mandelson was still a influential figure within Labour, but sort of behind the scenes. So he used to have this frontline role where he was in government, but he's been a sort of advisor for the party for decades.

4:54Peter Mandelson: And there are people within the Starmer government who really appreciated his advice and counsel. And among those was Keir Starmer's chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, who was one of the main advocates of Peter Madison having this role. And the argument for him having this role was that he was a former EU trade commissioner. He knew that that was going to be a big deal when it comes to relations between Britain and America over the coming years. And so he did have a relatively appropriate CV, but also on that CV was all the previous scandals. So they knew they were taking a gigantic risk by putting him into this high profile role.

5:29Peter Mandelson: So what happens now? Well, everything becomes rather messy. So Peter Mannerson has resigned from the Labour Party, so he technically has nothing to do with the party anymore. And he's also stepped down from the House of Lords. So he's no longer a legislator in Britain's unelected upper chamber. But he is still technically a peer, which he does still have this honour. And if the government want to strip him of that, they have to pass a law effectively stripping him of that. So everything becomes quite medieval, very, very quickly with titles being removed. And most seriously of all, the police are now investigating whether what he did when he was in government broke the law.

6:04Peter Mandelson: And so we could end up with Peter Manesson in prison at some point in the future. And what could all of this mean for Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister? Politically, it's a complete mess. Keir Starmer's entire selling point was that he is a clean brewing, that he's a straight up person, that he's not like the other politicians. and so there's a strange irony that this guy who came in saying I'm not like the others then appointed this man who was very much like the others who was one of the reasons why people have lost faith in politics in the past 20 years because he's always had this dodgy cv with instance where he has had to step down for various scandals and so to bring in this person who was so tainted was always a gigantic risk and it's blown up in Keir Starmer's face so Peter Mandelson's career is now, this time, definitely over.

6:55Peter Mandelson: Duncan, thank you for talking to me. Thank you.

7:10Peter Mandelson: Do you want to be a better writer? Maybe even master the clarity and eloquence of an economist journalist? If so, let me tell you about a business writing and storytelling course compiled by our own editors and journalists and run by Economist Education, a division of The Economist Group. You, dear listeners of the intelligence, are favoured with 15 % off. The course starts on February the 10th, and you can register at economist.com slash writing course. Use the code econwriting-15. The link is in the show notes.

7:52The Economist: Some of the kinder words spoken about Michael O 'Leary down the years are descriptions such as outspoken or controversial. Simon Wright is our industry editor. Of late, the Ryanair boss has stepped a little bit back from the spotlight. But as Elon Musk recently discovered he's still up for a fight, the world's richest man recently called Mr O 'Leary an idiot for not installing his Starlink satellite Wi-Fi on Ryanair planes. Mr O 'Leary answered Mr Musk by launching a big idiot sale and he also thanked Elon Musk for all their free publicity.

8:27Peter Mandelson: You know, it is very good for our bookings and, you know, we love these PR spats that try bookings on Ryanair. I'm sure it does wonders for Elon Musk and his ex or whatever subscribers he has on ex as well to be fighting with somebody.

8:41The Economist: As part of the ding-dong, Elon Musk threatened to buy Ryanair. Because he's not a citizen of the EU, he can't do so. But if he could, it would be an excellent investment.

8:52Peter Mandelson: Well, tell me why you say that. Why Ryanair is doing so well.

8:55The Economist: Over the past 30 years, Mr O 'Leary's built Ryanair from a tiny, barely profitable airline into one of the world's most successful carriers. It's the largest in Europe by some way. It has a fleet of over 640 planes and a fifth of the continent's capacity. The latest quarterly results looked pretty good. expects to carry 208 million passengers in the financial year ending in April. That's roughly double the amount of the big low-cost competitors in Europe, EasyJet, and triple that of WhizAir. Not only that, the net margin of around 15 % compares very favourably with the worldwide average of just 4%.

9:32The Economist: I mean, airlines are a way of losing money generally, and Ryanair makes some money and makes an awful lot of it. Since the start of 2023, its shares have risen by 130%, far outpacing the global industry.

9:44Peter Mandelson: Now, some people might suggest that Mr. O 'Leary has created this grand success by really, really pinching in a miserly and unfriendly way all of his customers.

9:54The Economist: I don't think that's unfair. Like Elon Musk, who didn't invent the electric car, Mr. O 'Leary didn't invent the low-cost model. That was invented by Southwest Airlines in the US. He borrowed that model and he refined it and perfected it. And to keep fares at bargain basement rates, Mr. O 'Leary's laser-like focus on costs, he's never stepped away from that. One of the upshots of that is that he has been re-educating passengers about how they fly. And in some cases, that's looked a little bit like taking them for a ride, as it were.

10:29Peter Mandelson: Yeah, like taking me to an airport that is allegedly in some capital city, but is actually in some airport that's 30, 40, 50, 60k away.

10:36The Economist: Look, part of that model is using cheaper airports, the ones that the big carriers don't use. They're incentivized, particularly if they're owned by a local government who want to bring in tourists to make it worth Ryanair's while. But the reason you're getting these cheap fares is because you might have to go to an airport that's a little bit out the way. That's just how it goes. If you're not prepared to look at the map and find out where their airport is, perhaps you should have done so. I think that's probably what Mr. O 'Leary would say.

11:05Peter Mandelson: No doubt. And yes, I do have maybe a little bit of an axe to grind here, but surely some of the financial success comes from squeezing passengers in ways they weren't expecting.

11:16The Economist: In order to quote Dick Emery, a comedian whose heyday was probably in the 1970s in the UK, he had a catchphrase and it was, Ooh, you are awful, but I like you. And it's that sort of tension between the incredibly low fares and perhaps not being treated quite as well as you might be if you travelled on a legacy airline like BA. The low-cost model involves using a single type of plane, the Boeing 737, which keeps costs low from maintenance, pilot training and the likes. Because Ryanair is so big and so successful and because it has so much cash, it can invest counter-cyclically. And what I mean by that is it can go to Boeing when Boeing needs to sell planes and it can make a big order for those planes and it can get a very good deal as a result of that.

11:59but also there's an opportunism involved if it sees an area where an airline is struggling

12:07The Economist: and the collapse of Alitalia a few years ago is a great example of that it'll move in it's allowed Ryanair to take 40 percent of the share of the Italian domestic market because it stepped in where Alitalia was failing the same thing with SAS and its troubles in the pandemic Ryanair moved into Copenhagen and Stockholm as well what seems to me after years of watching Ryanair's success

12:29Peter Mandelson: but also lots of other airlines' attempts to cut costs is they've stolen Ryanair's tricks, the things that we used to just get for free we now pay for as we first paid for on Ryanair. Is there a sense that the race to the bottom, if you will, is dragging lots of perhaps legacy airlines with it?

12:43The Economist: Look, it's certainly true that Ryanair just operates in Europe. The legacy airlines have a completely different business model in that they make most of their money flying passengers from one airport to their hub airports and then on into international flights. but they need to fill up their planes as well. And in order to do so, they've had to use some of the low-cost tricks because the only way of filling up those planes is to make fares at least reasonably competitive with the low-cost competitors. Even on Legacy Airlines now, you'll have to pay extra for your baggage and food and drink on board.

13:17The Economist: I took a BA flight yesterday and their only concession to luxury, if you want to call it that, was to give me a tiny bottle of water and two biscuits. So you're absolutely right.

13:28Peter Mandelson: And so the model is paying off, will continue to pay off, you reckon?

13:31The Economist: I think absolutely. It's one of those things where even if something goes wrong in the airline industry and things have gone wrong in the past, what are people going to do? They're probably going to trade down and go for even cheaper flights. So I think long term, it looks like they're insulated in that way. But also they've made a giant order for up to 300 larger, more fuel efficient versions of the Boeing 737, the MAX 10. Those should start to arrive in 2027, which will keep costs low and also propel the airline towards its goal of shifting 300 million passengers by 2034. Mr O 'Leary said he's probably going to stick around until around then as boss.

14:05The Economist: In the meantime, it's very unlikely Mr Musk or anyone else will have any chance of unseating him.

14:11Peter Mandelson: Simon, thanks very much for your time.

14:13The Economist: Thank you, Jason.

14:25Sir Keir Starmer: Same-sex sexual behaviour has been recorded across the animal kingdom. So far, records exist for over 1 ,500 species.

14:34Peter Mandelson: Bella King works on The Economist's news desk.

14:38Sir Keir Starmer: Evolutionary biologists have called this behaviour a paradox. How is it that a trait that leads to non-reproductive sex is not eliminated by natural selection? But it's actually not a paradox at all. Same-sex sexual behaviour doesn't preclude different-sex sexual behaviour, but it is a puzzle. Something so widespread must presumably have some evolutionary function.

15:03Peter Mandelson: So what are the guesses as to what the evolutionary function might be?

15:07Sir Keir Starmer: So far, there hasn't been much research into the behaviour. it's either not been taken seriously as a field of research, as a topic, or it's been too laden with human concerns to have yielded much data. A popular theory is that same-sex sexual behaviour has a social function, that it's used to facilitate bonding within groups, to reduce conflict. But unfortunately, data that would either support or refute this is still sparse and mostly anecdotal.

15:38Peter Mandelson: So how to go about supporting or refuting it, though? What data would be better?

15:43Sir Keir Starmer: Researchers at Imperial College in London looked for all recorded instances of same-sex sexual behaviour in animals. They consulted over a thousand books and publications. Of those, 500 were of non-human primates. And of those, about 23 species had multiple recorded instances of this behaviour. They then compared this data set to data on environmental factors, such as climate data pulled from satellites, such as data on how species are distributed, on the number of predators in various areas, and details on life history traits, which means how different are males to females? How different do they look?

16:33Sir Keir Starmer: Are males bigger than females? What are their lifespans? What are the group structures that they live in? Are they very complicated? Are they very stratified? Or are they more simple?

16:43Peter Mandelson: So if the idea is that this same-sex sexual behaviour is sort of a bonding mechanism, these researchers reckon that the bonding should happen more strongly or weakly in different environments, or indeed in different species where conflict is more or less likely, I guess. What did they find?

16:58Sir Keir Starmer: In harsher environments, in environments where social cohesion might be more necessary, they found that same-sex sexual behaviour was more likely to occur. In areas where the climate was particularly extreme, for example in very dry parts of the world or very cold, they found that in that group same-sex sexual behaviour was more prevalent than in groups living in more temperate climates. They also found that in areas where there were more predators, species were engaging in more same-sex sexual behaviour. For example, vervet monkeys, they rely on each other to issue warning calls when threats are near.

17:43Sir Keir Starmer: That is contingent on good group cohesion, which is then, the researchers suggest, aided by same-sex sexual behaviour.

17:50Peter Mandelson: So that's the kind of environmental, I guess, external forces that may be in play here. But what about the life history stuff you were talking about? What's sort of internal to specific to these species?

18:03Sir Keir Starmer: So they also found that same-sex sexual behavior was more likely to occur in species with certain life history traits. For example, they found that it was higher among those species with pronounced sexual dimorphism, which is when males are larger than females. They also found it was more common in species with longer lifespans. The researchers suggest that under these conditions, same-sex sexual behaviour may be being used to navigate these social dynamics over time. Social complexity was also a driver of this type of behaviour. So species that lived in larger groups did it more. Those that lived in more stratified hierarchies also had higher rates than those that lived in smaller, less complicated social groups.

18:54Sir Keir Starmer: So this suggests that this kind of behavior may be being employed by individuals within groups to relieve social tension, to reduce rank-related conflict, and just generally promote harmony within groups.

19:10Peter Mandelson: this is certainly a collection of interesting ideas and correlations but it doesn't feel like proof proper the the paradox that is in fact a puzzle is still a bit of guesswork absolutely

19:23Sir Keir Starmer: i think one of the main takeaways from this study is that there just hasn't been enough research into this behavior in non-human primates i think all that can be said for certain is that this behavior is really widespread across the animal kingdom and it's an important part of primates social repertoires.

19:42Peter Mandelson: Bella thanks very much for joining us.

19:44Sir Keir Starmer: Thanks for having me.

20:01Peter Mandelson: That's all for this episode of The Intelligence. See you back here tomorrow.

20:15Thank you.