Starmer-Mandelson latest: PM admits he inadvertently misled parliament over vetting scandal

Political reporter Athena Stavrou reports:

Downing Street has doubled down on blaming Foreign Office officials for the latest revelations around Peter Mandelson’s vetting.

No 10 has said it the Foreign Office was asked “repeatedly” about details of Mandelson’s security clearance to be appointed US ambassador.

They said at no point was the fact UK Security Vetting recommended against his appointment ever shared with Downing Street officials or ministers.

The prime minister’s official spokesperson said: “No 10, Cabinet Secretary, the Cabinet Office repeatedly asked questions about the facts around this case.”

Last week, it was revealed that The Independent had in fact put claims Lord Mandelson had failed vetting to No 10 seven months ago.

Asked whether questions were asked about this story in particular, the spokesperson said: “Questions around security vetting, questions around the process were asked repeatedly.”

Downing Street has hinted that the prime minister accepts he unknowingly misled MPs by not telling them that Lord Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting.

Sir Keir Starmer has repeatedly told MPs that due process was followed when Lord Mandelson was appointed. New information has come to light that suggests this was not the case – but No 10 insists Sir Keir did not know this, which is not regarded as a resignation offence.

Asked whether the prime minister misled parliament, his spokesperson said:

“The prime minister would never knowingly mislead parliament or the public. He’s clear, though, that this information should have been provided to parliament. It should have been provided to him, it should have been provided to other government ministers.

“But he clearly did not have this information – that is the crucial fact – he clearly did not have this information when he previously spoke to parliament.”

Sir Keir Starmer faces a showdown in the Commons on Monday afternoon after it was revealed last week that Peter Mandelson failed crucial security vetting for his appointment as US ambassador, but was given the role anyway after Foreign Office intervention.

The prime minister had already announced that Lord Mandelson would be sent to Washington when he was denied critical clearance, but the Foreign Office took the rare step of overruling the recommendation, the government has admitted.

The prime minister has been accused of misleading parliament over the appointment, prompting calls for him to resign.

But why did Lord Mandelson fail his security vetting? Albert Toth has this report:

Political reporter Athena Stavrou reports:

One of the key questions raised about the ill-considered appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador is why the decision was announced ahead of the vetting process.

A document published in the first tranche of files related to his appointment appear to show a letter from then-cabinet secretary Lord Simon Case, advising Lord Mandelson should undergo security vetting before he was appointed.

Asked whether the prime minister considers his failure to take the advice a mistake, his official spokesperson said: “As you’ve heard since the since this case….we’ve changed the process by which appointments can be made ahead of vetting.”

Pressed on why the prime minister had not decided to vet Lord Mandelson before announcing his appointment, they said: “As is normally the case with external appointments to the FCDO and the wider civil service, the appointment is made subject to obtaining security clearance.”

Downing Street has repeatedly refused to say whether Sir Keir Starmer will correct the record after telling Parliament the proper process had been followed in making Lord Peter Mandelson ambassador to the US.

Asked whether the Prime Minister accepted he had misled Parliament, his official spokesman said: “The Prime Minister would never knowingly mislead Parliament or the public.

“He’s clear though, that this information should have been provided to Parliament, should have been provided to him… so he will obviously update the House with the full information.”

Asked whether he would correct the record, the spokesman said he would be “updating Parliament with information” that he should have had previously.

Pressed on whether this meant he was effectively admitting he did inadvertently mislead Parliament, the official said Sir Keir would be “updating Parliament with the full facts of this case.”

Nigel Farage has said he would vote with the Tories if they held a vote of no confidence to remove Sir Keir Starmer.

Both he and Kemi Badenoch have called on the prime minister to resign over the ongoing Mandelson vetting scandal.

He said: “If there’s a motion of no confidence put down, yes we would support it.

“But it’s not going to pass, the Labour backbenchers are not yet of a mood to get rid of their Prime Minister. Although, after May 7, they just might be.”

Sir Olly Robbins will appear before MPs on Tuesday to answer questions following the row over Lord Peter Mandelson’s vetting for his appointment as US ambassador, the Foreign Affairs Committee has confirmed.

Sir Keir effectively fired the Foreign Office’s top official last week after it emerged Lord Mandelson had been given developed vetting (DV) status despite failing checks carried out by the agency responsible for assessing security clearances.

At a press conference in Westminster, the Reform UK leader said: “Last September, David Maddox from the Independent came out very strongly to say he’d been told from sources that Mandelson had failed vetting.

“So it’s impossible for the Prime Minister to say the warning lights weren’t flashing.”

He added: “And if you were prime minister and there were news reports last September that your ambassadorial choice had failed vetting, you would have thought perhaps you might have had some curiosity to try to find out whether this has really happened or not.”