Starmer faces British Parliament showdown over Mandelson vetting scandal

Prime Minister Keir Starmer told MPs the proper process had been followed in appointing Mandelson (PA)

Keir Starmer will battle to save his job in British Parliament on Monday by setting out further details of the “unforgivable” errorby officials in not telling him Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting.

In a Commons statement, Mr Starmer will be faced with allegations he misled Parliament after telling MPs the proper process had been followed in appointing Mandelson to the post of ambassador to the US, insisting he had been kept in the dark about the peer being red-flagged by security experts.

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

Whitehall veteran Mr Robbins is expected to give his own account to MPs on Tuesday at the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The scandal has fuelled calls for Mr Starmer to resign, both from opposition parties and from his critics within the Labour movement who already fear an electoral bloodbath for the party in May’s contests in English councils and the Scottish and Welsh parliaments.

The British Prime Minister’s defence will be to blame officials for not telling him or the then foreign secretary David Lammy that UK Security Vetting (UKSV) had not cleared Mandelson.

A statement issued by No 10 on Sunday night said that although civil servants rather than ministers make decisions on vetting and clearance, there was nothing in the law to prevent ministers being told.

“There is nothing in the guidance which prevented information being shared in this scenario, in a proportionate and necessary way and subject to the appropriate procedural steps,” the statement on the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act said.

While there are “legal obligations” under data protection rules, “no law prevents civil servants – while continuing to protect such sensitive personal information – from sensibly flagging UK Security Vetting recommendations or high level risks and mitigations”.

UKSV’s privacy notice sets out there are “limited circumstances in which relevant vetting information can be shared” if “a security risk has been identified”.

Sir Olly Robbins was effectively fired for not telling Sir Keir Starmer that Lord Mandelson had failed the initial vetting check (Dominic Lipinski/PA)

Mr Starmer told the Mirror he would make it “crystal clear” to MPs that he had been kept in the dark and it was “unforgivable” that the Foreign Office failed to tell him after he had offered public assurances that proper process had been followed.

The Prime Minister said: “The fact that I wasn’t told that Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting when he was appointed is astonishing. The fact that I wasn’t told when I said to Parliament that due process had been followed is unforgivable, and that’s why I intend to set out in Parliament on Monday the facts behind that, so there’s full transparency in relation to it.

“But am I furious that I wasn’t told? Yes, I am. Am I furious that other ministers weren’t told? Yes, I am. I should have been told, and I wasn’t told.”

The Prime Minister will face accusations he misled Parliament – potentially a resignation matter – Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has claimed Mr Starmer is “either lying or he’s incompetent”.

Asked if he would apologise to MPs on Monday, the Prime Minister said: “I’m going to set out in terms what happened.

“But I shall be making it absolutely crystal clear, as I have done a number of times, and I don’t think anybody is disputing this, that I was not told that Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting, and I should have been told.”

He will say the information should have been provided to both him and MPs a long time ago.

This has been a tawdry and shaming affair for you and your party, and for this country

Instead, the Prime Minister was only informed about the vetting issue on Tuesday evening after the information was uncovered as part of the process of gathering files related to Mandelson’s appointment to comply with an order by MPs to release all relevant documents.

Allies of the Prime Minister insisted that Monday was the first opportunity he has had to set out the full facts to Parliament, despite appearing in the Commons on Wednesday for his regular question time session.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall told the BBC: “I think one thing we’ve learned from this whole torrid episode is the need to get the facts absolutely clear and right. That’s really important.”

In a letter to the Prime Minister, Mrs Badenoch said: “As an experienced barrister, you will know the importance of telling the truth, but you will also know that many people think you have been at best recklessly negligent and at worst dishonest about this whole affair.

“You have failed to answer very simple questions about what you did and what you knew. This is contemptuous of Parliament, discourteous to the House, and against the fundamental requirement set out in your own Ministerial Code.”

Mandelson was sacked last year, just nine months into the Washington DC posting, after further details of his association with the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein emerged.

Mrs Badenoch said: “This has been a tawdry and shaming affair for you and your party, and for this country.

“Not only have you damaged our relationship with the United States and insulted the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, but you have also undermined our national security by giving the highest diplomatic post to an individual that the security services found to be of ‘high concern’.”