23 resultsfor “Mandelson security clearance scandal”
Mandelson not be granted clearance. Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, told MPs during an emergency debate on the scandal: “The prime minister personally decided to appoint a serious, known national security
scandal” – that’s the lead story in the **Guardian** at the start of the week. “Mandelson had top level of security clearance
Mandelson was a scandal magnet, it was Robbins’ job to implement the wishes of the PM, not block a decision, and an assessment of risk, that had already been taken. Last night, ahead
scandal. The public deserves the truth, not another cover-up. “If it turns out that Starmer was aware at the time that Mandelson’s security vetting was overruled, that would represent a major abuse
security vetting, arguing the final decision on clearance was his to make. Senior Whitehall officials have criticised Starmer’s decision to sack Robbins for – in their view – following the rules, and suggested the move
security clearance, to the sound of jeers from opposition lawmakers. “It doesn’t appear that he asked any questions at all. Why? Because he didn’t want to know,” Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said
scandals](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/11/mandelsons-rollercoaster-career-grinds-to-a-final-stop-with-a-scandal-again). He was also known to have been a friend of Jeffrey Epstein, even after the New York financier was convicted of sexual offences against children. Starmer [sacked Mandelson](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/11/keir-starmer-sacks-peter-mandelson-over-jeffrey-epstein-revelations)
security clearances and do due diligence on any potential conflicts of interest or other issues of which you should be aware before confirming your choice”. The letter, sent on 11 November 2024, said the decision
Security Vetting (UKSV) to deny clearance for Mandelson, told MPs on the foreign affairs committee on Tuesday that [“constant pressure”](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/21/olly-robbins-peter-mandelson-vetting-keir-starmer) was applied. It comes as [divisions emerged in cabinet over Starmer
scandal, Cat Little, the head civil servant in the Cabinet Office, was low key and often cautious. But she did reveal several pieces of new information – or at times information different to that given
clearance for Mandelson and had taken a “dismissive” attitude to vetting. Emily Thornberry, the committee chair, asked whether it had been McSweeney, to which Robbins said it was mainly the prime minister’s private office
scandal will not give evidence before MPs A key figure in the row over Peter Mandelson’s appointment as UK ambassador to Washington will not appear before a parliamentary committee of MPs to give evidence
scandal with divisions emerging in cabinet over his decision to sack the Foreign Office civil servant Olly Robbins.”  Guardian splash Photograph: Guardian And this morning the saga continues, with
security committee (ISC). And so it was in that capacity, of gathering all the relevant materials that had to be released to the public or the ISC, that Little said she had her crucial face
scandal, Keir Starmer has told MPs, as he sought to set out his side of events in a politically crucial statement in parliament. Saying to jeers that he accepted it appeared “incredible” he and other
security. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has demanded the papers be released by the end of the week. In November, the then head of the civil service, Sir Chris Wormald, said [Lord Mandelson was not formally
clearance in late January 2025 after a “highly confidential background check by security officials”, but that Starmer had already announced the appointment. Faced with a “dilemma”, the Foreign Office officials had proceeded
scandal as key figures give evidence to MPs - UK politics live From Good morning. The former US president Lyndon Johnson is credited with saying the most important skill in politics is knowing how to count
scandal. The home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, is understood to have questioned whether it was justifiable to [sack Robbins](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/21/olly-robbins-keir-starmer-mandelson-vetting-foreign-office) for his failure to tell Starmer that Mandelson had failed vetting, and then
Security Vetting (UKSV), then he wouldn't have pressed ahead with the appointment. That's because Sir Olly's implicit claim - contested vigorously now by No 10 - is that the political team in Downing Street