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

McSweeney was very clear in his remarks. He advised Starmer to appoint Mandy because of Mandy’s experience as a Trade Envoy for the EU.
Obviously Starmer agreed with McSweeney and the appointment went ahead.
Ironically Mandy probably did facilitate a good trade deal between the US and the Uk. This is clearly what the government wanted.

ronib

I was hoping for so much more from the anti sleaze government… so much for that line of propaganda.
We really have a sorry bunch of politicians. Carry on regardless?

In your opinion.

In some people’s opinions, on and off here, if Starmer said grass was green he’d be a sleazy liar!

I’ve never know a PM so constantly slated by media of all types.

Wyllow3

I thought this morning made it clear McSweeney had a big part in pushing the recommendation

(us Labour left of centre wanted him to go for a long time) very hard, he's an apparatchik and I don't like political wheeler dealers a great deal from anyone

; it was rushed when it shouldn't have been, but there was pressure to get someone in place becuase of political events in the USA:

The civil servant made it very clear he was NOT instructed to short cut processes or ignore available information: yes there were pressures to do it quickly (which meant it was being taken seriously)
BUT it's not unsusal for the civil service to be asked to fast forward matters.

I dont think Starmer has anything to add that has not been said already, frankly: he has apologised openly and frankly,

its quite clear to me he wouldn't go and appoint someone connected with such a child and woman abusive person - you can call him what you like (or what the right wing press are dining out on, drinking the coolaid atm)

but he would never knowingly make such an appointment neither would ANY politician I would sincerely hope.

But of course, it all has to be Starmer’s fault, it all has to be a corrupt cover-up, those Starmer bashers wont accept anything else!

Sorry, did I miss the bit where Starmer's name is in the Epstein Files?
Now those are a sleazy bunch of folk.

I was hoping for so much more from the anti sleaze government… so much for that line of propaganda.
We really have a sorry bunch of politicians. Carry on regardless?

I thought this morning made it clear McSweeney had a big part in pushing the recommendation

(us Labour left of centre wanted him to go for a long time) very hard, he's an apparatchik and I don't like political wheeler dealers a great deal from anyone

; it was rushed when it shouldn't have been, but there was pressure to get someone in place becuase of political events in the USA:

The civil servant made it very clear he was NOT instructed to short cut processes or ignore available information: yes there were pressures to do it quickly (which meant it was being taken seriously)
BUT it's not unsusal for the civil service to be asked to fast forward matters.

I dont think Starmer has anything to add that has not been said already, frankly: he has apologised openly and frankly,

its quite clear to me he wouldn't go and appoint someone connected with such a child and woman abusive person - you can call him what you like (or what the right wing press are dining out on, drinking the coolaid atm)

but he would never knowingly make such an appointment neither would ANY politician I would sincerely hope.

Spinnaker

Oreo

Primrose53

McSweeney says “I got it wrong”.

They’re all covering their backs now, everyone loses their jobs bar Starmer.
Funny that 🤔

I'd love to know who's been promised what in an effort to cover Starmer's back - it's sickening.

I’d be interested to know what people are hoping for as the end result of all this. Change of party leader? If so who do they want to replace him? Change of government? If so which party do they want to be in power? As far as I’m concerned I want Starmer to remain as leader and Labour to remain in power. But I’d love to know what those who seem to be gleefully watching all this unfold actually want from it.

Oreo

Primrose53

McSweeney says “I got it wrong”.

They’re all covering their backs now, everyone loses their jobs bar Starmer.
Funny that 🤔

I'd love to know who's been promised what in an effort to cover Starmer's back - it's sickening.

Primrose53

McSweeney says “I got it wrong”.

They’re all covering their backs now, everyone loses their jobs bar Starmer.
Funny that 🤔

And?

McSweeney says “I got it wrong”.

Just as he said too 'so much happening both at home and overseas- what is the matter with them?'
He said they need to get on with the jobs they are paid for instead of wasting time.
They are too introspective at times.

By this time I was well awake 😀

I agree with your DH Allira it is a waste of time when there is so much more they should be getting on with.
That's my grumble for the day.

Doodledog

Isn't it usual for councils to spend money at the end of the financial year?

Yes, but if you have £7 million left to spend on potholes and the estimate to do a Proper Job is £60 million, it's not going to fill many.

Did Mandelson have a company contracted to fill potholes?
Why are we discussing this? I know threads meander but I had to remind myself what the OP was about 😀

DH woke me with a cup of tea this morning and started grumbling about Parliament wasting time going on and on about Starmer's future as PM. "Good morning to you, too, dear".

Copied from another forum written by someone who isn’t a fan of Starmer
“A criminal trial, in which the Prime Minister will be indirectly involved, commenced today in the Old Bailey. But you could be forgiven for not knowing it.

To recap, three Ukrainians (one a Romanian citizen) are accused of committing acts of arson against properties and vehicles owned (or formerly owned) by Keir Starmer. They are charged with endangering life – a very serious matter.

Yet the media, including outlets which are not friendly to Starmer and his government, seem to believe this to be not newsworthy. Not even a small paragraph anywhere”.

I had to laugh at Starmer in parliament pleading the vetting process was handled correctly, when it obviously WASNT.

Of more interest will be Barton and McSweeney before Emily Thornberry this morning.

Yes, that’s what I was getting at.

Doodledog

Isn't it usual for councils to spend money at the end of the financial year?

Yes that is normal because if they don't spend the budget they have failed, no credits for economy and it can't be carried forward

Withholding money from councils that fail to effectively maintain roads sounds a good idea, except the councils who are already not doing that will simply add the “no money” excuse to their existing reasons.

We currently have regular sessions of MPs standing round on pothole photoshoots, but they say they can’t do anything . . .

Yes, but there has been an additional allocation this year. I’m in Wales, and we have had a similar funding stream.

‘As of April 2026, the UK government is implementing strict new rules for £1.6 billion in pothole funding, threatening to withhold up to one-third of funds from councils in England that fail to effectively maintain roads. This initiative is part of a larger £7.3 billion, four-year funding package for local highway maintenance to tackle the "pothole plague". ‘
GOV.UK
+5

Isn't it usual for councils to spend money at the end of the financial year?

I believe Powys has one of the biggest rural road networks in the UK by the way. Obviously this doesn’t address backlog underinvestment issues, but at least it means that our tyres should survive.

If you look it up you should be able to see what your own council is doing. All councils have had additional funding to tackle it. As I said, mine is doing a pothole blitz, it started last financial year, and they have now invested in new technology, including JCB "pothole pro" machines, which can fix a pothole in 8 minutes apparently.

Our Council is so far behind with filling potholes they claim it would cost £60 million to fill them.

Why are we talking about potholes or is it because we think Mandelson should be shoved into one?