10 resultsfor “intelligence and security committee statement on Mandelson”
intelligence and security committee (ISC), which is overseeing the process of releasing the documents, published a statement on Friday [accusing the government of redacting and withholding documents](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/15/peter-mandelson-vetting-file-withheld-isc) against the wishes of parliament
Intelligence and Security Committee, who would decide what could and could not be published. The first tranche of documents [was published](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvg150715jet) in March. In his statement, Lord Beamish said the committee
intelligence and security committee (ISC) has criticised the government over its handling of the release of Mandelson-related papers and in effect accused ministers failing to comply with parliament’s will. In February, parliament passed
Mandelson was sacked as ambassador last year after the emergence of new revelations about the extent of his relationship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In February, MPs voted to force the government
intelligence and security committee (ISC).  The cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, left joins Keir Starmer
Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), who are expected to assess it before returning it to the government within days for public release. The Guardian understands this includes a short summary document including details of Mandelson
statement to MPs on Monday, Starmer turned this into a process debate. But that focusses attention on whether he was right to sack Robbins and many people watching the former civil servant yesterday took
statement](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69e51eff2570f65c2716d9be/Statement_on_Constitutional_Reform_and_Governance_Act__CRAG__2010_-_implications_for_national_security_vetting..pdf) setting out its interpretation of the law, claiming nothing stops civil servants from "sensibly flagging UK Security Vetting recommendations." They even delve into the explanatory notes
statement to MPs on Monday](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/19/starmer-faces-commons-showdown-over-mandelson-vetting-scandal) setting out how Peter Mandelson was able to take up his role as UK ambassador without the Foreign Office revealing it had overruled the decision to fail
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