Mandelson vetting decision “utterly unacceptable” – chief secretary to PM
With the prime minister in Paris for talks on the opening of the strait of Hormuz, his chief secretary, Darren Jones, has been taking flak for the Mandelson vetting revelations on the morning media rounds.
Jones has told broadcasters the Foreign Office’s decision to overrule the security vetting findings was “utterly unacceptable”
He said he had ordered an urgent review after discovering that the Foreign Office and other Government departments the right to ignore security advice when appointing people to sensitive roles.
He told Sky News:
It is utterly unacceptable, not just in the individual case of Peter Mandelson and respect of the prime minister’s fury at the Foreign Office for not having taught him this information, but the very fact that their processes were in place that allow for that to happen in the first place.
That’s why in my role in the Cabinet Office, immediately last night, I suspended the rights for these organisations to make these judgments.
I’ve asked for an urgent review about what decisions these organisations have taken in the past to overrule the recommendations from UK security vetting, and I was due to announce a broader, independent review of the vetting process anyway. And this will now be part of that.
Earlier on ITV’s Good Morning Britain programme, Jones said he had suspended the rights of the Foreign Office to overrule security vetting recommendations. He said:
As soon as I found out last night that the Foreign Office and a small number of other organisations have the right to ignore the recommendation… I immediately suspended those rights and ordered an urgent audit.
Key events
Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth said “there is no trust without transparency” as he called on No 10 to “admit its incompetence”.
In a post on X, he wrote:
No trust without transparency. So many questions remain unanswered and with every passing day the Prime Minister is distracted from the day job and failing those he serves.
It’s time for the No10 operation to come clean or admit its incompetence.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has called for the prime minister to stand down.
Posting on X, Farage said: “It’s time for Keir Starmer to go.”
Farage told broadcasters that the Foreign Office’s top civil servant Olly Robbins is the “sacrificial lamb in an attempt to try and save the Prime Minister”.
He told LBC: “None of this adds up, the idea they weren’t told about the vetting. Remember, in the House of Commons, Starmer actually said that the vetting had told him about the ongoing relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, then outside of the House, in Hastings, he gave a speech in which he said that Mandelson had cleared security vetting.
“They are all over the place on this, it is totally unbelievable and Robbins, he’s the sacrificial lamb in an attempt to try and save the Prime Minister, and it just isn’t good enough.”
Farage said it is not credible or believable that the Government waited until Thursday to reveal security vetting procedures had been overruled because it wanted to launch a “full-scale investigation”.
The Reform UK leader told LBC the explanation is: “Just not credible, not believable in any way at all. I am in absolutely no doubt in my mind that this Prime Minister misled the House of Commons and lied to the country outside of the House of Commons.”
Farage said Robbins is “one of the most professional civil servants in this country” and “there is no way” he would have decided to overrule security vetting procedures alone.
The Reform UK leader told LBC: “There is no way a man like that would unilaterally make a decision of this kind, and, equally, the Prime Minister cannot stand up and say that Mandelson passed security vetting and now claim later he wasn’t told.
“That’s not incompetence, even Keir Starmer is not that incompetent, it is outright, blatant dishonesty.”
The Green Party leader for England and Wales, Zack Polanski, has called for Keir Starmer to resign.
Posting on X, Polanski said:
There’s no way today should end without Starmer’s resignation. Any other outcome would be an absurd scenario where this Labour Government – and all in it – would be laughing in our faces.
The ethics and morality are it (sic) are an important question. Just as vital and urgent is the fact it’s all such a distraction.
We have sky high bills and an energy crisis – we need to end Rip Off Britain. All attention needs to be on a Government capable of doing the basics.
Friday’s newspapers and broadcasters were dominated by the Guardian’s revelations that Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting clearance but the decision was overruled by the Foreign Office to ensure he could take up his post as ambassador to the US.
The story splashed on the front pages of the Daily Mail, Express, Daily Telegraph, The Times, the i Paper and the Financial Times.
The Mail leads with “Starmer on brink as his Mandelson ‘lies’ are exposed”. The paper says party leaders have accused the prime minister of “lying to MPs and say he must now resign”, while the i leads with “Starmer in peril again as No 10 turns on the Foreign Office”.
The BBC on both radio and television, as well as Sky News, Times Radio, LBC and other commercial stations have all been leading with the story on their bulletins.
Here’s a round-up of the papers:
Last night there were calls for Sir Olly Robbins to appear again before Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee to explain what happened – but now questions are being asked as to whether he will be able to give an account of what happened in light of his resignation.
Emily Thornberry, senior Labour MP and the committee’s chairwoman, told Sky News last night: “Perhaps he can tell us… was it his own idea, or was he being leant on elsewhere?
“Or was he, being a civil servant, was he getting direction from elsewhere, and if so, by whom?”
She also pointed to the careful language in a letter she received from Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper on the vetting process, which noted that: “The vetting process was undertaken by UK Security Vetting on behalf of the FCDO and concluded with DV clearance being granted by the FCDO.”
Thornberry said: “It says he was vetted, and it says he was appointed, but it doesn’t say it was overridden… I’m saying is that, you know, people have basically been telling us half the story.”
Foreign secretary only aware of Mandelson vetting fail when Guardian broke story
Pippa Crerar
The Guardian understands that Yvette Cooper and her office only became aware that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting when the newspaper broke the story on Thursday.
The foreign secretary spent the evening in the department and Downing Street with the prime minister where she spoke to Sir Olly Robbins. They concluded that he could no longer continue in post.
Jones denied reports that senior government officials have been considering whether to withhold from parliament sensitive documents that show Mandelson failed security vetting before he assumed the role of US ambassador.
Asked by BBC Radio 4’s Today programme about the reports, he said “That’s not true”.
Jones said the process required the documents to go to Metropolitan Police and the Intelligence and Security Committee before they are published. He added:
We’ve already published one tranche of documents and we’ll publish another tranche soon.
Asked why the prime minister did not correct the record in the House of Commons when he appeared at prime minister’s questions, Jones said Starmer wanted to wait to have “all the facts” before appearing before the house, which he intends to do on Monday.
Jones repeatedly denied that the prime minister had given a misleading impression about what has happened and had “lost grip” of the situation. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme:
I completely refute the suggestion the PM misled the public or the House of Commons. It’s very clear from his words he was reporting what he had been told and what had been followed.
Challenged on the prime minister’s ability to lead, Jones said:
I don’t think this is a question about the prime minister’s leadership.
Jones told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme that the prime minister only became aware of the Foreign Office’s decision to grant vetted status to Mandelson against the advice of security officials when documents were provided to the Cabinet Office on Tuesday.
The Foreign Office did not tell the prime minister that they granted developed vetting status to Peter Mandelson against the advice of the security and vetting process. The prime minister was only made aware of that on Tuesday evening this week when the documents became available to the Cabinet Office as part of the humble address process (a binding motion to request government papers – JG).
No minister is allowed to see these vetting documents as a matter of principle because we employ security professionals to conduct deeply invasive personal investigations into people’s backgrounds and for those officials to make a recommendation to civil servants on the appointment and employment of individuals.
Appearing on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Darren Jones said he found out yesterday afternoon that the Foreign Office had overruled the vetting recommendation. He said:
Look I find this whole situation astonishing, I found this out yesterday afternoon… the Foreign Office and a small number of other organisations have the right to ignore the recommendations of security and vetting officials when appointing people to sensitive roles.
I immediately suspended the right last night for the Foreign Office and other organisations to be able to use that exemption.
Jones said security officials recommended that Mandelson was not appointed to the role but could not explain why.
I’ve not seen the documents or the detailed information. This is deeply personal information about financial, personal background and particular views and relationships. It’s normal for that information to be kept only by the security officials who conduct this work because it is so invasive into their personal lives.
Back on the morning rounds, Darren Jones, chief secretary to the prime minister, has been addressing the calls for Keir Starmer to go.
Starmer has not considered resigning and did not mislead Parliament, he said.
Asked on BBC Breakfast whether the Prime Minister is going to resign, and whether he has either knowingly or unknowingly misled Parliament, Jones responded “no”.
Jones explained that technically the process was followed correctly because UK Security Vetting undertake their investigations and then make a recommendation to the relevant sponsoring department, who then have the right to reject the recommendation.
As a result, he has now suspended the right for departments to ignore vetting recommendations.
Continuing her criticism of the prime minister, Badenoch told BBC Radio 4 Today’s programme: “The fact is all roads lead to a resignation.”
She said:
The fact is the prime minister is telling everyone that he was told [about the Foreign Office vetting decision] on Tuesday.
The Ministerial Code states that when a minister discovers… that parliament has been inadvertently misled they need to correct the record at the first opportunity. The first opportunity was on Wednesday morning at prime minister’s questions. He gave a long sermon about all sorts of things, refused to answer questions I asked him, and didn’t tell the house, that in itself is a breach of the ministerial code.
Claiming full due process was followed when it wasn’t – another breach, misleading parliament. Breaching the ministerial code by telling people the security services had cleared him.
The fact is all roads lead to a resignation.
It doesn’t matter what story the prime minister is telling, at some point there is deliberate dishonesty – whether it’s the cover up story or the original story – one of these is deliberate dishonesty, they cant all be true, and that’s why I know he is lying.
‘Preposterous’ to believe Starmer did not know about vetting decision, claims Badenoch
Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservatives, has told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that she believes the prime minister is lying in his account of what happened.
It’s completely preposterous for us to believe that when the prime minister said on the floor of the house [of Commons] the full due process was followed that officials who knew that was not the case would not have told him. He knew.
It is preposterous for us to believe that on 5 February, him giving press conference saying that Mandelson was cleared by the security services nobody told him that actually that this was not the case.
It’s completely preposterious, the prime minister, the former chief prosecutor, did not ask basic questions, did not ask to look at the security vetting himself.
It’s also completely preposterous that civil servants would have cleared a political appointee who had failed security vetting. Mandelson was not a mandarin he was a Labour party grandee appointed to be our most senior diplomat and ambassador.
Badenoch added that is not believable that the documents had not been seen by parliament
We would not have found out about this if not for the Guardian.
The story does not stack up, the prime minister is taking us for fools.
Sir Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, is among voices calling for the PM to go.
He has said even if the prime minister’s explanation – that he was unaware of the Foreign Office’s decision to overrule Mandelson’s failed vetting until this week – is “true”, he should still resign.
Davey also warned that if the PM doesn’t go of his own volition, his party will “take action” in parliament to remove him.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Davey said:
I don’t think the prime minister can get out of his responsibility by sacking Olly Robbins – the buck has to stop with Mr Starmer.
I think frankly it’s inconceivable on such a sensitive matter the permeant secretary at the Foreign Office wouldn’t have referred to ministers on this.
It’s also a matter of national security, essentially the Foreign Office found that prime minister should not be given top secret information.
Davey said he believed the claim that the prime minister did not know about the Foreign Office’s move until this week was “not credible”.
Let’s imagine they are telling the truth and they did only just learn about this on Tuesday what does that say about the Governmenet and how they operate?
It means people around the prime minister were hiding critical information from him and he took this decision without meeting Mandelson, without knowing about his failed security but knowing about Mandelson’s reputation.
I think the evidence suggests he misled the commons and he misled the public that’s against all the rules and that’s why we’ve called for him to go and I think that if he doesn’t go, we’re going to have to take some action in parliament.
Davey likened the scenario to former Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson’s final days in office.
It’s hard to believe it was inadvertent, it stretches credibility, but even if that is a true story it shows there was total negligence and incompetence at the top of his government…
The PM held the Conservatives to account when he was in opposition when Boris Johnson was clearly lying over partygate and Keir Starmer called for all the accountability and called for Boris Johnson to go… but I’m afraid now he he has to take his own medicine. All the evidence suggests he has to go.
Mandelson vetting decision “utterly unacceptable” – chief secretary to PM
With the prime minister in Paris for talks on the opening of the strait of Hormuz, his chief secretary, Darren Jones, has been taking flak for the Mandelson vetting revelations on the morning media rounds.
Jones has told broadcasters the Foreign Office’s decision to overrule the security vetting findings was “utterly unacceptable”
He said he had ordered an urgent review after discovering that the Foreign Office and other Government departments the right to ignore security advice when appointing people to sensitive roles.
He told Sky News:
It is utterly unacceptable, not just in the individual case of Peter Mandelson and respect of the prime minister’s fury at the Foreign Office for not having taught him this information, but the very fact that their processes were in place that allow for that to happen in the first place.
That’s why in my role in the Cabinet Office, immediately last night, I suspended the rights for these organisations to make these judgments.
I’ve asked for an urgent review about what decisions these organisations have taken in the past to overrule the recommendations from UK security vetting, and I was due to announce a broader, independent review of the vetting process anyway. And this will now be part of that.
Earlier on ITV’s Good Morning Britain programme, Jones said he had suspended the rights of the Foreign Office to overrule security vetting recommendations. He said:
As soon as I found out last night that the Foreign Office and a small number of other organisations have the right to ignore the recommendation… I immediately suspended those rights and ordered an urgent audit.
What you need to know
The story about Mandelson’s vetting moved quickly overnight so here are the key developments you need to know about:
-
Yesterday evening, the Guardian exclusively revealed Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting clearance but the decision was overruled by the Foreign Office to ensure he could take up his post as ambassador to the US. According to multiple sources, Mandelson was initially denied clearance in late January 2025 after a developed vetting process, a highly confidential background check by security officials. Keir Starmer had by then announced he would be making Mandelson the UK’s chief diplomat in Washington, posing a dilemma for officials at the Foreign Office, who decided to use a rarely used authority to override the recommendation from security officials.
-
The Guardian also revealed that senior government officials have been considering whether to withhold from parliament sensitive documents that show Mandelson failed the security vetting checks. Any such decision could amount to an extraordinary breach of a parliamentary vote, known as a humble address, that ordered the release of “all papers” relevant to Mandelson’s appointment. According to multiple sources, officials across government have been in dispute over whether to release documents that would reveal those facts, and other information about Mandelson’s security vetting, to the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC).
-
The Guardian understands that Starmer – who insiders said was furious – first learned that Mandelson had failed security vetting on Tuesday this week, while then foreign secretary David Lammy learned about it when the Guardian broke the story two days later. Late on Thursday, Sir Olly Robbins, the UK Foreign Office’s top civil servant, has been forced out of his post over the decision. Robbins was the Foreign Office’s most senior official in late January 2025 when the decision was made, paving the way for Mandelson to become the US ambassador.
Pressure on Starmer over Mandelson revelations
Good morning and welcome to the UK politics blog amid the revelation that Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting clearance but the decision was overruled by the Foreign Office to ensure he could take up his post as ambassador to the US.
Sir Olly Robbins, the UK Foreign Office’s top civil servant, has already been forced out of his post overnight and there are calls from opposition parties for the prime minister himself to resign.
Keir Starmer is in Paris to chair a gathering of world leaders on the opening of the Strait of Hormuz as the revelations sink in in Westminster and Whitehall.
Stay with us for all the developments and reaction.
