Sir Keir Starmer has directed the Foreign Office to clarify the process that led to Lord Peter Mandelson being appointed as UK ambassador to the US, as it was revealed that the department had overridden a security vetting procedure.
The Government disclosed that the Prime Minister was unaware of the decision to grant developed vetting to the former Labour figure against the advice of UK Security Vetting until recently. Subsequently, he promptly instructed officials to investigate the circumstances surrounding the granting of the vetting, with the Foreign Office stating that they are working urgently to address this inquiry.
Sources from Downing Street indicated that the Prime Minister is deeply displeased with the situation. This development follows a report by The Guardian stating that security officials had initially rejected clearance for Lord Mandelson. However, after he was already designated as the UK’s top diplomat in the US by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Office intervened and overruled the initial recommendation.
Sir Keir has maintained that the appointment followed due process and refuted claims that Lord Mandelson had misled about his connections with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender.
Although independent vetting by security services allegedly cleared Lord Mandelson for the role, The Guardian reported that he did not receive approval from the Cabinet Office’s UK Security Vetting in January last year.
A Government spokesperson asserted that the decision to grant developed vetting to Peter Mandelson against UK Security Vetting’s advice was made by Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) officials. Upon being informed, the Prime Minister instructed officials to ascertain the reasons behind the vetting decision in order to update the House of Commons.
There are indications that the Prime Minister might address MPs on Monday regarding this issue, although No 10 did not confirm this. Additionally, Sir Olly Robbins, the top civil servant at the Foreign Office, has been requested to appear before the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee next week to provide insights into the matter.
Dame Emily Thornberry, a senior Labour MP and the committee’s chair, has raised questions about the decision-making process and whether external influences were at play. She referenced a letter from Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper regarding the vetting process, highlighting the need for clarity on the matter.
Calls for Sir Keir to resign have emerged from various political figures, with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticizing his handling of the situation. Similarly, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey condemned the delayed disclosure of information to Parliament.
Lord Mandelson, a political appointee, faced scrutiny and was dismissed from his ambassadorial position in Washington following revelations about his association with Epstein. The decision to appoint him despite ongoing concerns about his connections has sparked criticism against Sir Keir.
The vetting process, involving both public domain checks and confidential security assessments, came under scrutiny for its handling of Lord Mandelson’s appointment. The ongoing controversy has led to calls for a review of the vetting procedures within the government.
Overall, the situation surrounding Lord Mandelson’s appointment has raised significant questions about transparency, accountability, and decision-making processes within the UK government.
