Mandelson failed security vetting. Starmer says he didn’t know

The rules state that the PM does not have to know why.

Not being told the reasons is fine. I get that.

Not being told he had failed the vetting makes no sense at all since the vetting was undertaken for the purpose of advising KS whether the appointment can go ahead.

The analogy with a head teacher is again pertinent. Head asks for DBS checks, these are done, candidate fails so doesn't get job.

Luckgirl Robbins / The Foreign Office made the decision to pass Maddleson, despite security services advice to ‘fail’ him.

The DV process has a Red/Amber/Green system. It was up to a very small group of civil servants, led by Robbins, to decide on the outcome of the vetting. They decided on Green = pass!

The PM is only told the final outcome of the DV process which, in this case, was PASS. So, as far as the PM is concerned … the appointment is good to go.

It’s arguable that the DV system, as it stands, is not fit for purpose. But that’s the system🤷‍♀️

The King and Foreign Secretary appoint ambassadors.

Luckygirl this is from today’s Observer:

“Robbins was sacked by Keir Starmer on Thursday night after the Guardian revealed that he had approved Mandelson’s appointment, even though the former minister and EU commissioner had failed high-level security vetting, known as DV.

Robbins was not in the country at the time and is understood to have been blindsided by his rapid defenestration, which was followed by the publication of a template used by UK Security Vetting (UKSV) to show a “RAG” grading (red, amber or green) according to the vetters’ level of concern. “Where vetting officers felt there was a significant concern over the granting of vetting to an individual, they would mark the ‘high concern’ and ‘clearance denied or withdrawn’ boxes,” the document said.

An attached summary of a meeting revealed that Starmer was told last Tuesday that “the recommendation from the vetting officer had been that DV should not be granted to Peter Mandelson”. The summary adds that there is “some discretion for departments to proceed with clearance and the FCDO had exercised it in this case… contrary to the recommendation”.

Why the FCDO (Robbins) employed this discretion we don’t know. We may find out on Tuesday when he gives evidence … but based on his appearance at a previous committee, I’m not holding my breath.

The Foreign Office made the decision to pass Mandelson, despite security services advice to ‘fail’ him. - that certainly does sound like a basic flaw in the system!

Spot on Luckygirl👍

Thing is. If all of these 'disclosures' are meant to be kept private, then PM may have a legal case to sue.

Maremia

Thing is. If all of these 'disclosures' are meant to be kept private, then PM may have a legal case to sue.

Good point.

We will never be told what UKSV’s concerns were nor should we as that’s confidential information.

At best we may discover whether Robbins considered those concerns insufficient to not give clearance, or whether they were but he felt under pressure to give the clearance because this was a political appointment. Even if that was the case, there would a difference between thinking he had to give clearance and being told he had to.

Seems to me that soon after his [Robbin’s] appointment, he made a judgement call that would probably have been fine but for the further release of the Epstein files revealing Mandelson’s continued association with the felon and that he passed confidential government information to him over 2009/2010. That’s why Mandelson was sacked.

If there is no correlation between what UKSV flagged and what was revealed in the Epstein files it would seem that Robbins has been harshly treated for just doing his job.

sixandahalf

*There is a lot of excellent reporting on the DM site regarding KS. Andrew Neil who is a great journalist and very sharp indeed has written a piece as has Kemi Badendoch who is, again, asking for his resignation*

Well she will won't she?

Of course but so are a lot of others! The Green Party, the Lib Dems and some within the Labour Party and just about everybody I speak to. He is the least popular PM ever.

Be careful what you wish for Primrose you may get Angela Raynor as PM and I know you love her.

AGAA4

Be careful what you wish for Primrose you may get Angela Raynor as PM and I know you love her.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Primrose, one problem is that there is nothing better waiting in the wings, either in the LP or any other party.

Just read that Johnson failed his security check when he was appointed Foreign secretary #nosurprisetherethen

But Mandelsson failing is the least surprising thing as well, on a number of fronts to be honest. I agree that it is very possible Robbins has been treated badly and if so that won't end well.

Well, it will be a sorry day if Mandelson is the downfall of Starmer, especially in these uncertain times.

This is a distraction from the the more serious issues at present. What is happening in the middle east and how it is affecting our country adversely is being overshadowed by the Mandelson problem.
Hopefully it will be sorted very soon and the PM can get on with steering us through the rough times created by Trump.

Galaxy

But Mandelsson failing is the least surprising thing as well, on a number of fronts to be honest. I agree that it is very possible Robbins has been treated badly and if so that won't end well.

So, in your opinion, Robbins was right to ‘ignore’ security recommendation to fail Maddleson … even though as you say, his ‘failure’ was unsurprising?🤔

How quickly the narrative has shifted - from ‘Starmer’s a liar’ to ‘Starmer’s treated Robbins badly’.

In what way do you think it ‘won’t end well’ Galaxy?

Seems to be a couple of fatal flaws in the system, one is why did KS insist on choosing Mandelson in the first place when the world and his wife knew he was dodgy and announce he would be the new Ambassador to the US before any vetting had taken place.
Secondly, if as keeps being stated, Robbins wasn’t allowed to tell anyone at all about the security vetting then why was he immediately sacked this week?

The bigger flaw IMO is why does the system allow the FO to exercise discretion in accepting the vetter’s decision?

If that’s going to happen, why bother having a DV process in the first place?

Probably the FO do a good job normally but this one was of supreme importance, such an important post and such a poor choice by the PM.

It's not a narrative it's an opinion. Or should I say look at the 'oh but Iran we must stick with him' narrative. If the system is such that Robbins followed the system then yes that is problematic. Robbins by many accounts is not well liked and I find it vaguely interesting that even those who don't like him are raising concerns. I think it won't end well in a number of ways, I think Mandelsson will be the downfall of Starmer,whether next week or at a later date. It was really 'partygate' that finished Johnson, whatever happened in the end with Chris Pincher, and I think when Starmer goes it will be traced back to the appointment of Mandelsson ( not even the vetting, the actual decision to appoint).

It was really 'partygate' that finished Johnson, whatever happened in the end with Chris Pincher, and I think when Starmer goes it will be traced back to the appointment of Mandelsson ( not even the vetting, the actual decision to appoint)

I think you might be right, what a mess.

He is the least popular PM ever.
Are you sure?!

Luckygirl3

*He is the least popular PM ever.*
Are you sure?!

Many sections of the media would have you believe that he is, so the mantra is repeated.