Starmer Alleges Foreign Office Officials Concealed Mandelson’s Vetting Outcome

Sir Keir Starmer claimed that government officials intentionally delayed informing him about Lord Mandelson’s initial security vetting failure for the US ambassador post. During a parliamentary address, the prime minister stated he would have avoided the appointment had he known earlier. Starmer learned of the Foreign Office’s decision to override the security vetting agency’s advice just days prior, revealing the clearance was granted despite concerns.

Vetting Process Timeline

The vetting of Lord Mandelson began in late December 2024, with the UK Security Vetting agency recommending denial of clearance on 28 January 2025. However, Foreign Office officials proceeded with approval, despite the agency’s warning. The appointment was announced in December 2024, with Mandelson officially taking office on 10 February 2025. He was dismissed seven months later due to his links with Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender.

“The PM had ‘thrown his staff and officials under the bus’ instead of ‘taking responsibility’,” said Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who urged Starmer’s resignation. She criticized his earlier assurance to MPs that “full due process” was followed, arguing he should have corrected the record sooner.

Ministerial Code and Accountability

Starmer denied misleading Parliament, citing the Ministerial Code which holds ministers accountable for intentional falsehoods. He emphasized that the withholding of information was a conscious choice, not an oversight. The code requires ministers to resign if they knowingly mislead, while mistakes should be rectified promptly.

Key Figures and Information Gaps

Starmer highlighted that the head of the Civil Service, Sir Chris Wormald, and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper should have been informed about the vetting outcome. He described it as “astonishing” that this information was not shared when he requested a review. Cooper was also criticized for not being made aware, with Starmer calling the omission “absolutely unforgivable.”

“A deliberate decision was made to withhold that material from me,” Starmer told MPs. “This wasn’t a lack of asking. This wasn’t an oversight. It was a decision not to share the information repeatedly.”

Aftermath and Further Scrutiny

The sacking of Sir Olly Robbins, the most senior civil servant at the Foreign Office, followed a Guardian report exposing the department’s override of the vetting recommendation. Starmer initially avoided naming Robbins, referring to officials instead. When pressed, he admitted Robbins had not shared the details during a review ordered by the PM. Robbins is set to testify before the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday.

“When we previously asked the senior civil servant about the vetting process, we got a partial truth,” noted Labour MP Dame Emily Thornberry, chair of the committee. She raised questions about whether securing Peter Mandelson’s role took precedence over security concerns, suggesting some in the PM’s team prioritized his appointment over due diligence.

Despite earlier reluctance from some Labour MPs, one described Starmer’s handling of the situation as “abysmal,” reflecting the growing discontent within the party. The controversy surrounding the appointment continues to cast a shadow over the prime minister’s leadership.