Fans feel 'gouged' by £111 World Cup train tickets
Fans outraged as World Cup train tickets reach £111 for a 30-minute ride!
BBC News1 min read
Keir Starmer says it is unforgivable he was not told Mandelson failed vetting
TL;DR
Keir Starmer expressed anger over not being informed that Peter Mandelson failed security vetting before his appointment as ambassador to Washington. He called the situation 'unforgivable' and is under pressure to clarify who was aware of Mandelson's vetting status.
Key points
- Keir Starmer was not informed of Mandelson's vetting failure.
- Starmer called the situation 'unforgivable'.
- He expressed his fury over the lack of communication.
- Mandelson's appointment as ambassador is now under scrutiny.
- The incident raises questions about government transparency.
Mentioned in this story
Keir StarmerPeter Mandelson
Keir Starmer has said it was “unforgivable” that he was not told that Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting before being appointed as ambassador to Washington.
The prime minister said he was “furious” about what had happened, as he insisted he had not known that security officials had initially recommended that Mandelson be denied clearance.
Speaking on Friday morning for the first time since the Guardian broke the story, Starmer said: “That I wasn’t told that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting when he was appointed is staggering.
“That I wasn’t told that he had failed security vetting when I was telling parliament that due process had been followed is unforgivable. Not only was I not told, no minister was told, and I’m absolutely furious about that.”
The prime minister is under pressure to explain who knew what about Mandelson’s vetting, after the Guardian revealed on Thursday that the former peer had failed the checks.
Mandelson was appointed to the post in late 2024, despite concerns among senior members of the government about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein even after the financier had been convicted of child trafficking.
He was sacked by Starmer last year after emails were published by the US Department of Justice showing how close he was to Epstein, to the extent that he shared sensitive government information with him while working for Gordon Brown. He denies any wrongdoing.
Sources have told the Guardian that security officials initially recommended that Mandelson not be given security clearance for the role, but that they were overruled.
It remains unclear who gave the order for the clearance to be granted, though Starmer sacked Olly Robbins, the most senior civil servant in the Foreign Office, on Thursday night.
The prime minister will appear before MPs on Monday to give a statement about what happened and what he knew.
He said on Friday: “What I intend to do is to go to parliament on Monday to set out all the relevant facts in true transparency, so parliament has the full picture.”
Q&A
Why did Keir Starmer call the situation regarding Peter Mandelson 'unforgivable'?
Keir Starmer deemed it 'unforgivable' because he was not informed that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting when he was appointed, which contradicted his statements in Parliament.
What was the reaction of Keir Starmer to the news about Mandelson's vetting failure?
Keir Starmer was furious upon learning that security officials had recommended denying Mandelson clearance and expressed his outrage publicly.
What are the implications of Peter Mandelson failing security vetting for his ambassadorial role?
The implications include potential accountability issues for the government and increased scrutiny on who was aware of Mandelson's vetting status during his appointment.
