Senior civil servant says due process followed in Peter Mandelson vetting
Cat Little appearing before the Foreign Affairs Committee (House of Commons/UK Parliament/PA)
A senior British civil servant has said due process was followed when vetting Peter Mandelson for his post as ambassador to Washington, as Keir Starmer faces mounting criticism over the scandal.
Cabinet Office permanent secretary Cat Little has been uncovering documents related to the peer’s appointment to the role being released under the humble address process forced by MPs in February.
She answered questions at the Foreign Affairs Committee after Olly Robbins, who the Prime Minister sacked as Foreign Office chief for failing to tell him about details of the vetting decision, appeared before the same group of MPs earlier this week.
“So my view is that due process was followed, and if I might explain why I believe that it is because the process as I’ve outlined to the committee, is that UKSV (UK Security Vetting) make a recommendation and the Foreign Office make a decision as to whether to grant DV (developed vetting).
“That is the process, and that is the process that is agreed with the Foreign Office,” Ms Little said.
Ms Little last week told the Prime Minister that Mr Mandelson had been granted high-level security clearance despite vetting officials recommending against it.
She had known since March 25 about sensitive information linked to Mr Mandelson’s vetting.
She said on Thursday she acted as “swiftly and effectively” as she could in informing the Prime Minister but that it took some time to get expert legal advice about how to deal with such sensitive information.
Ms Little said Mr Robbins had refused to share vetting information with her and that she took the “very unusual” decision to request it from security officials directly.
“I took the very unusual judgment that I should directly request the information from UK Security Vetting, and I did that because I go back to my responsibilities to discharge the humble address, which is a responsibility that is unique to me, and I take very seriously.
“I felt that I needed to see some relevant documentation so that I could advise the Prime Minister as to whether we had fully complied and gathered the information that was available and within scope.”
She also revealed that there was an initial discussion over whether Mr Mandelson needed security vetting at all because he was a member of the House of Lords.
“Because the presumption had been that given Peter Mandelson had been a member of the House of Lords, that the long-standing convention that he didn’t require developed vetting was assumed, and they wanted to get proper policy advice from experts on whether that was the case,” she said, referring to documents that showed such a discussion.
Meanwhile, Labour backbenchers have openly voiced doubts about Mr Starmer’s future since it emerged last week the Foreign Office decided to appoint Mandelson despite the fact he failed the vetting process.
However, a junior minister on Thursday said claims of a Cabinet split over the scandal are “a load of guff”.
Home Office minister Alex Norris told LBC: “If I had a pound, certainly under the previous government, for the number of times I saw Cabinet stories in the papers, my St George’s pints would probably be more multiple than there will be in reality.”
Responding to calls from Labour MP Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) for the Prime Minister to step aside, Mr Norris insisted to Sky News that Mr Starmer would lead Labour into the next election.
The minister added: “What I would say to Jonathan and to others is, look at what we delivered this month alone.”
He listed “huge decreases” in NHS waiting lists and lifting the two-child limit on benefits as among recent action by the Government, adding: “This is a Government that’s getting on with change, spearheaded by our Prime Minister, and we should be all pulling in that direction.”
On Wednesday, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden repeatedly declined to say whether he believed the sacking of Mr Robbins was fair.
As pressure mounts against the Prime Minister, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch is said to be pressing for his referral to the Privileges Committee claiming he misled MPs, the Times reported.
The same committee found former prime minister Boris Johnson lied to the Commons over so-called partygate.
The Tory leader has suggested Mr Starmer misled the Commons when he said “due process” had been followed in the appointment of Mandelson as British ambassador to the US, according to the newspaper.
He has denied misleading MPs.
Mr Starmer’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney has also been summoned to appear before the Foreign Affairs Committee next week.
The row over Mr Robbins’s sacking dominated the Prime Minister’s Questions clash with Kemi Badenoch.
He insisted Mr Robbin's evidence about Mandelson exonerated him over accusations that he had misled MPs.
The mandarin’s testimony “puts to bed all the allegations levelled at me by those opposite in relation to dishonesty”, the Prime Minister said.
Mr Starmer’s fate could be decided if Labour MPs move against him after May’s elections for English councils and the Scottish and Welsh parliaments.
YouGov projections indicated Labour was on course for disastrous results in its former London and Welsh strongholds.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
