Auto Amazon Links: No products found.
Sir Olly Robbins, a former high-ranking Foreign Office official, has publicly criticized Downing Street for what he described as a “dismissive attitude” toward the vetting process during Lord Mandelson’s appointment as the UK’s ambassador to the United States. Last week, Sir Olly was dismissed from his position after it emerged that he had cleared Lord Mandelson for the role despite security concerns raised by officials, without informing Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
During a session before MPs, Sir Olly defended his decision, asserting that he followed the appropriate procedures despite facing “constant pressure” from No 10 to expedite Lord Mandelson’s appointment. Downing Street rejected allegations that they had taken a lax approach to vetting and argued that it was reasonable to request progress updates on the ambassadorial nomination. Lord Mandelson had been announced for the position in December 2024 and underwent detailed vetting to secure the necessary security clearance.
The former Labour minister was dismissed from his ambassadorial role in September of the previous year following revelations about his close ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted child sex offender. Lord Mandelson has since expressed regret about ever having known Epstein. Sir Keir Starmer appointed him to the ambassador post, a decision that has led to months of controversy and calls for the prime minister’s resignation.
According to reports last week, Sir Olly’s department went against the recommendation of vetting officials who advised against granting Lord Mandelson security clearance. Sir Keir described it as “incredible” that he was not informed of the vetting outcome. In his testimony before the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Sir Olly revealed that there was “constant pressure” from Downing Street to swiftly approve Lord Mandelson’s appointment. He noted that officials in the Cabinet Office initially believed vetting might not be necessary for someone of Mandelson’s standing, emphasizing the peer’s status as a member of the House of Lords and privy councillor. Despite these pressures, Sir Olly insisted that his department took security concerns seriously and managed the risks appropriately.
Sir Olly further explained that while UK Security Vetting (UKSV) regarded Lord Mandelson’s case as borderline and leaned towards denying clearance, the Foreign Office’s security team believed the identified risks could be mitigated. He also mentioned that disclosing details of the vetting process to the prime minister beyond the final outcome would have been against the rules. The gravity of retracting Mandelson as the nominee was underscored by concerns over potential diplomatic fallout with the then-incoming administration of US President Donald Trump.
On the political front, Sir Keir denied accusations of misleading Parliament, reiterating that “full due process” was followed during the appointment and stating he would have acted differently if he had known the vetting outcome. The opposition seized upon the controversy, with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch calling for a vote of no confidence in Sir Keir’s leadership, accusing him of failing in his role and undermining civil servants. Within Labour ranks, dissent was limited, though some MPs like Liverpool West Derby’s Ian Byrne have called for a comprehensive review of the political circumstances that brought Sir Keir to power.
Additionally, questions emerged regarding claims that Downing Street had considered offering a diplomatic role to the prime minister’s then-director of communications, Lord Doyle. Lord Doyle denied seeking or being offered such a position, and No 10 declined to comment on personnel matters, confirming only that Lord Doyle did not take up any Foreign Office role after leaving Downing Street
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
Auto Amazon Links: No products found.