Prime Minister Says He Was Unaware of Mandelson’s Vetting Failure

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer described it as “staggering” that he was not informed about Lord Peter Mandelson’s failure to clear initial security vetting checks when appointing him as US ambassador. The revelation has sparked demands for Starmer’s resignation, with Tory leader Kemi Badenoch labeling the explanation as “completely preposterous” and suggesting “all roads lead to resignation.”

Opposition Calls for Leadership Resignation

At a Westminster press conference, Badenoch accused Starmer of being “so blinded by his own righteousness that he cannot see what everybody else can see,” claiming he “cannot hope” to continue leading the country due to his “incompetence.” She emphasized that Labour MPs hold the key to removing the prime minister, as there are not enough Conservatives to secure a no-confidence vote.

Lord Mandelson was named UK ambassador to the US in December 2024 before comprehensive vetting was completed. He officially assumed the role in February 2025 and was dismissed seven months later over his connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Guardian Investigation Unveils Vetting Oversight

A Guardian report revealed that Mandelson was appointed despite failing initial vetting. The government clarified that no minister was informed of the decision at the time, with Starmer only learning of it this week. In Paris, Starmer stated:

“That I wasn’t told Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting is staggering. That I wasn’t informed when I told Parliament due process had been followed is unforgivable.” “No minister was told, and I’m absolutely furious about that. What I intend to do is go to Parliament on Monday to set out all the relevant facts in true transparency.”

Senior minister Darren Jones defended Starmer, asserting he did not mislead MPs about the vetting process. Jones noted there was no rule requiring ministers to be briefed on such decisions at the time, though he said he has since amended that policy.

Vetting Services and Foreign Office Authority

The UK Security Vetting service provided the Foreign Office with an explicit “no” recommendation for Mandelson’s appointment. This recommendation, part of a three-tier system (“yes,” “yes with caveats,” “no”), was overruled by the Foreign Office, which is the only department in Whitehall authorized to disregard such advice.

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey criticized Starmer’s explanation, calling it “just doesn’t stack up.” He urged an investigation by the Privileges Committee, akin to the one used against Boris Johnson over Partygate, to determine if the prime minister intentionally misled Parliament. A spokesperson from the Liberal Democrats has also requested an inquiry into the matter.

Olly Robbins Quizzed Again

Foreign Office head Sir Olly Robbins, who was recently dismissed, will face scrutiny again next Tuesday. Dame Emily Thornberry, chair of the Foreign Affairs select committee, has invited him to testify, marking his second appearance in the inquiry. Meanwhile, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar, campaigning in Edinburgh, highlighted the need for clarity on whether Robbins acted independently or under external pressure.

Starmer’s administration now faces intense political pressure as details of the vetting oversight continue to emerge, with key figures from across the spectrum demanding accountability and transparency.