the fact is that the government has had to be dragged to do this by members of this house members on both sides of this house and so to produce a 135 page document and put it online 23 minutes before this debate is really not acceptable at all I do respect the Chief Secretary coming and doing this himself but it really ought to be the prime minister sitting there because all of this is about the prime minister's judgement judgements. And so it's very convenient that this document was published after prime minister's questions today, and the man who made the decision, the man whose judgment is in question could have been put under scrutiny by honourable members. There are very many questions that arise from documents published right now. I will put a few on record and then I'll return to central theme. There is the issuance of severance pay which Chief Secretary-Prime Minister referred to. Why did Ministers agree to any severance to pay, given what had happened. I think a lot of our constituents will be disgusted that Peter Mandelson received £70,000. Will Peter Mandelson's full declaration of interests, that he was supposed to have handed over when he was appointed, be published? I don't believe that they are included in the trust today. Is this because of a police request or is it for some other reason? Will the Chief Secretary publish a register of withheld and delayed documents so that the House can be aware of what is being held back? And will he give us a little more information by the now and future on redactions? It is important that this house understands who is deciding on what will be redacted. This awful saga involving Jeffrey Epstein continues. I understand that as this house meets one of his ranches in New Mexico is being investigated because there are reports that bodies are buried there. At the center of this scandal was a very rich and powerful man who despicably abused his position shouldn't. And he was helped.