Search

Retired high court judge to review Peter Mandelson’s vetting process

Mandelson would not have been able to take up his role as ambassador in Washington, risking embarrassment to [Starmer who had selected him as a political appointee](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/nov/03/starmer-briefed-on-peter-mandelson-jeffrey-epstein-links-before-appointing-him-say-civil-servants). Since the Guardian’s revelations

Key figure in Mandelson vetting row will not appear to give evidence to MPs

Starmer was right to sack Sir Olly last week. In a letter to the interim Foreign Office boss, Dame Emily set out some questions for Collard to answer in writing, including: "How often

Starmer should face Commons inquiry over Mandelson vetting, says Ed Davey

Mandelson’s vetting process. It seems there were,” she said. “Who overrode these concerns? Why were we kept in the dark? People need to stop messing us about and tell us the truth.” Downing Street

How safe is Starmer’s premiership after his Mandelson vetting statement to MPs?

Mandelson’s own lack of candour. He is firm in his mind that he would never have made the appointment had he known about the failed vetting. Perhaps that is correct. Allies of Starmer insist

Starmer faces Commons showdown over Mandelson vetting scandal

Starmer told the [Daily Mirror](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-mandelson-wasnt-told-37038699): “The fact that I wasn’t told that Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting when he was appointed is astonishing. “The fact that I wasn

Three key statements Starmer made to MPs about Mandelson vetting

vetting MPs are to vote on Tuesday over whether Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer should be investigated in Parliament for allegedly misleading the House of Commons. It relates to several comments he made about

Starmer to face MPs for first time since Olly Robbins’ Mandelson evidence – UK politics live

vetting process had raised the concerns about Mandelson’s previous conduct of which he was already well aware. > > As Robbins explained yesterday, the question for him was not whether to tell the prime minister what

‘Self-serving stuff’: anger remains high in Whitehall over Olly Robbins sacking

Starmer but he did gesture towards difficult relations with the political side, talking of “an atmosphere of pressure” and “dismissive” attitude to the vetting process, as well as refusing to name those who had taken

Chris Mason: PM facing awkward hours ahead as Mandelson questions remain

Mandelson's appointment to Washington, such as writing to the King about it on the 18th of December. In other words, it was a done deal. We already know some vetting issues had already been

Olly Robbins refused to hand Mandelson vetting summary to Cabinet Office, says Cat Little

question: could they get some advice? “Because the presumption had been that given Peter Mandelson had been a member of the House of Lords, that the longstanding convention that he didn’t require developed vetting

Partygate v Mandelson: Keir Starmer faces attack from his own playbook

vetting officials recommending that he be denied security clearance. That disclosure came about only because of a process started by Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader. Earlier this year, she secured a [“humble address”](https://www.theguardian.com

Labour figures criticise calls for inquiry into PM's Mandelson claims

vetting process for Lord Mandelson's appointment as the UK's ambassador to the US. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Sir Keir Starmer had misled Parliament "multiple times" on the subject. She urged Labour

Starmer could have been told about Mandelson’s vetting failure, claims No 10 with release of briefing paper – UK politics live

Starmer](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/keir-starmer) makes his statement to MPs about claims that the misled the Commons, and the public, about the vetting process carried out when Peter Mandelson was appointed ambassador

Senior Labour figures say call for new Mandelson investigation is a ‘political stunt’

questions haven’t been answered and it is decided that they are of sufficient importance that the privileges committee should be involved,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. Thornbery said

A grim week for Starmer – but things could be about to get worse

questions about the future of the prime minister took a turn for the worse for Sir Keir Starmer. If you had asked me a fortnight ago about the sentiment we were picking up from Labour

Ministers urged to share Mandelson vetting files with intelligence committee

vetting failure but did not inform [Keir Starmer](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/keir-starmer), the prime minister, for several weeks. Amid an impasse, there were fears among at least some officials that there might be a cover

No, Minister: the week Keir Starmer had his own Sir Humphrey moment

Mandelson took up the job, given that vetting result? “I was told – let me be completely precise – that UKSV [UK Security Vetting] were leaning towards recommending against, but accepted that it was a borderline case

PM defends record as Badenoch says he squandered election win

Starmer has defended his record in government after Kemi Badenoch accused him of having "squandered his political capital" in the last Prime Minister's Questions before elections next week. The Conservative leader said Sir Keir

Sacked civil servant to speak out in Mandelson vetting row

Starmer and is understood to be bruised and upset at both losing his job and the loud, repeated and personal criticisms of his conduct. A friend of Sir Olly told the BBC, in apparent contrast

Starmer was kept in dark about Mandelson’s vetting by two top civil servants

Starmer had announced Mandelson would be his ambassador to Washington. The document identified highly sensitive concerns UKSV had about Mandelson and recommended, in conclusion, that he should not be given security clearance. It was that