Subject: Invitation to Participate in Panel on Social Services Reform and Historical Accountability

Dear Baroness Grey,

11-09-2025

I hope this message finds you well.

I am writing to you with great respect to ask if you might be willing to lend your wisdom and experience to a panel I am seeking to establish on the history and future of social services reform. The panel’s aim is to examine the lessons of past inquiries and reports, and to consider their implications for safeguarding today.

Your long standing expertise would be invaluable to this effort. May I kindly ask whether you would consider serving on such a panel, and, if you are unable to participate directly, whether you could recommend others whose insight would be equally valuable?

As part of the research underpinning this initiative, I have been examining the Seebohm Report (1968/69) and subsequent events. Of particular note is the tragic case of Maria Colwell, a seven-year-old girl whose death in 1973 led to the report Children At Risk (April 1975, East Sussex County Council), which identified that around 100,000 children were in care at that time. This case became a landmark in UK child protection, revealing failures in structures that the Seebohm Report had already sought to address.

During this period, Matthew Dunkley was serving as Primary Education Officer for East Sussex County Council, later becoming a Harkness Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley. A Berkeley Schools Planning & Oversight Committee document (BSEP FY 1996–1997) even notes:

“Matt Dunkley is a Harkness Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, and is the Primary Education Officer for the East Sussex County Council.”

This points to a striking trajectory — Dunkley appears in senior roles in the UK, USA, and later in Australia. Yet, his name is absent from both the Seebohm Report and the Children At Risk study, despite his position at the time. This gap raises questions that I believe deserve careful and transparent examination.

The Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Social Services, chaired by Lord Frederic Seebohm, was appointed on 20 December 1965. Its report was debated in the House of Lords, where Baroness Brooke of Ystradfellte moved for papers to call attention to the findings. That historic debate and the recommendations it supported shaped decades of policy.

In light of these connections, I believe a panel discussion could play an important role in clarifying the historical record, identifying where reforms succeeded or failed, and exploring what lessons remain urgent today.

I would be most grateful if you could consider joining this effort or guiding me towards others who may wish to contribute.

With sincere thanks for your time and consideration,

Yours faithfully,

Martin Newbold
http://www.martinnewbold.co.uk

Where are the missing Epstein flight log pages?

In the U.S. federal court case Doe 1 v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (No. 1:22-cv-10019, S.D.N.Y.), Peter Mandelson is explicitly named alongside Tony Blair and Alistair Darling. One filing even uses the striking phrase “Tony Blair’s, Alister Darling and Peter Mandelson’s rotting stench? They must have been frothing …”  This appears in Document 256, Exhibit A (Redacted), filed November 2, 2023  courtlistener(dot)com(slash)docket(slash)65894178(slash)doe-1-v-jp-morgan-chase-co(slash)

In Deripaska v. U.S. Treasury (No. 1:19-cv-00727, D.D.C.), Mandelson’s name appears again, linked to sanctioned oligarch networks. courtlistener(dot)com(slash)docket(slash)6316920(slash)deripaska-v-united-states-department-of-the-treasury(slash)
Court dockets are truthful — Mandelson’s connections are in black and white. The press has also reported that Blair and Mandelson were recorded in Epstein’s pilot logbooks — yet the typed “Exhibit 662-RR” released by DOJ doesn’t show them. Journalists say the names appear in the handwritten pages, but where are those scans? Were they obfuscated behind redactions as “Doe 1–3”? This is the striking imbalance: ordinary parents like myself are dragged through secret courts and silenced by gagging orders, while elites retain their titles, their protections

• Understanding the Complexity of Peerage Revocation and NCA
• Corruption Investigations: IBAC’s Limitations Explained
• Child Trafficking Concerns and the EHCR
• Guide Series How to Report Child Abduction a complete Procedure
• Reinvestigating Child Exploitation Cases: Operation BeaconPort