20 resultsfor “details of Starmer's statement to MPs”
MPs tomorrow, but we know from what his friends have been saying is that he believes that he was not entitled to give the PM details of what is a very secretive process. The more
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 ministers were not told Mandelson
detailed timeline of events leading up to [Peter Mandelson](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/peter-mandelson) being refused security vetting and how the message was not passed to No 10. Here’s what his statement did tell
Starmer's chief of staff. Speaking at security conference in Ukraine, McSweeney said he found it "strange reading about a character with the same name as mine sometimes", as he spoke publicly for the first
MPs resume their king’s speech debate, focusing on energy policy. *1.30pm:* Rhun ap Iorwerth, the Welsh first minister, gives a statement to the Senedd setting out his priorities for goverment. *2pm:* MSPs meet
statement to MPs on Monday where he will set out how Mandelson was able to take up his role as UK ambassador without the Foreign Office revealing it had overruled the decision to fail
Starmer. But in front of MPs, Sir Olly defended his actions, insisting he had followed the proper process while under "constant pressure" from No 10 to get Lord Mandelson in post. No 10 denied claims
details of Mandelson’s personal life, and financial and business dealings – which the prime minister is also believed to have now seen – as well as the recommendation that Mandelson had failed vetting
MPs voted to force the government to publish all papers relating to the appointment through a parliamentary process called a humble address. The government initially opposed the motion arguing that it did not want
details of those investigations would not have been passed on to Number 10 or ministers. As sources told me in the autumn, and government still says publicly now, no concerns were raised with ministers
Starmer says there are "serious questions for police" following the release of bodycam vision showing how officers responded to the murder of teenager Henry Nowak. His killer Vickrum Digwa, 23, was jailed on Monday
Starmer has escaped unscathed. Ultimately [he won the vote pretty comfortably](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx21lx9ne83o) with a clear majority of MPs rejecting the idea that he should be referred to a parliamentary committee for investigation over
Starmer said the IOPC must examine whether racial sensitivities played a part in the case, saying: “It is impossible to watch that footage and not appreciate that those questions absolutely have to be answered
Starmer should be investigated in Parliament for allegedly misleading the House of Commons. It relates to several comments he made about the process of appointing Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador
statement to MPs on Monday as he struggles to overcome fears inside his government that the [Peter Mandelson](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/peter-mandelson) vetting scandal could yet cost him his leadership. In what
MPs to give evidence. Dame Emily Thornberry had requested that Ian Collard speak to the foreign affairs committee (FAC) on Tuesday, but confirmed on Saturday that he would submit written answers instead. The committee
detailing security mitigations that would have been necessary to address concerns identified by vetting officials, whose recommendation was overruled by the Foreign Office. [Sources told the Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/27/mandelson-vetting-warned-ties-senior-figures-china-russia-israel) that the vetting summary contained
Starmer has accused officials in the Foreign Office of deliberately and repeatedly withholding the fact Lord Mandelson initially failed security vetting for the role of US ambassador. Giving a statement to MPs, the prime minister
MPs: “The police in this country have a sacred duty: to police without fear or favour. Everyone in this country is equal before the law. It is the promise upon which our whole justice system
details on European negotiations which are already happening, and the nationalisation of British Steel which is, in effect, already nationalised.” Starmer had a brief dig at the Green party leader Zack Polanski, but reserved