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

Peaseblossom, you'll get more response if you ask GNHQ to move your post to the Meetups/Where are You? segment and to include the word Twyford in the heading.

(Alternatively, just start a new thread in Meetups and include Twyford in the title).

Is there anyone that lives in the Twyford, Berkshire area that would like to meet up for a coffee? I don't have a car, so I can't really go too far without having to get a bus or a train. I do belong to a women's group, but still spend a lot of time on my own.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Yes sorry for us.
Chagos going through nicely (and quietly) I hear.
And other things.
I think there’s a super injunction out. An interesting Court case tomorrow concerning the ars on attack on one of Starmer’s properties. A media omertà anyway but my sister tells me there’s a lot of discussion about it on X
🤔

A media omertà
😲 That sounds sinister!

Poor Starmer if it’s not one thing it’s another.

Oh thanks Primrose I didn’t see it.
Will keep an eye on the Old Bailey thread from tomorrow when the case is up.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Yes sorry for us.
Chagos going through nicely (and quietly) I hear.
And other things.
I think there’s a super injunction out. An interesting Court case tomorrow concerning the ars on attack on one of Starmer’s properties. A media omertà anyway but my sister tells me there’s a lot of discussion about it on X
🤔

I don’t do X but I hear your sister is correct. There are comments on the other thread on here.

It’s getting like Russia. You can vote for whoever you like but there’s only one candidate! 😉

Yes sorry for us.
Chagos going through nicely (and quietly) I hear.
And other things.
I think there’s a super injunction out. An interesting Court case tomorrow concerning the ars on attack on one of Starmer’s properties. A media omertà anyway but my sister tells me there’s a lot of discussion about it on X
🤔

Luckygirl3

Well thank goodness ... he can now get on with governing the country.

Absolutely.

The point is that there is no alternative to Starmer ….. yet.

With the whip in force would you expect anything else?

I'm glad. This has been a tsunami in a teacup. Now they can get on with the job .

Well thank goodness ... he can now get on with governing the country.

It's done.
MPs voted against Starmer facing a parliamentary inquiry over whether he misled MPs over Lord Mandelson's vetting.

What time is the vote?
I cant find the answer anywhere.

Apparently, Starmer is likely to easily win it.

love0c

Starmer should allow a free vote. Boris did! I sincerely hope he does allow MP's a free vote. It then gives the opportunity to see whether in fact there are still decent Labour MP's with integrity!

I agree

Starmer should allow a free vote. Boris did! I sincerely hope he does allow MP's a free vote. It then gives the opportunity to see whether in fact there are still decent Labour MP's with integrity!

So now we have a choice. Who to believe.
Starmer and No10 or this man with a lifetime of service.
It’s not a hard decision is it?

Well, the idea that Starmer is pushing a three line whip tonight to keep himself out of facing a privilege committee? Surely if he were innocent (believable) this wouldn’t be necessary?

No wonder the buses are often late with the number of people Starmer has thrown under them.

And McSweeney’s phone getting stolen. Not reported to the Police.
Handy that.

Cossy

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!

The media have been desperate to pin something on Starmer ever since they failed with donkeygate. If only they’d been so forensic pre referendum about Brexit benefits #stilllookingme…

ronib

Not quite. There’s clearly some problem with the way political appointees become ambassadors. If anything, there needs to be a much tighter vetting process which must fully precede the taking up of the position. It’s not a waste of time but essential. Cossy. Also the vetting body needs to have much more input into the final appointment going ahead. This very waffling situation shouldn’t happen again. Also the chain of command needs clarification. Does the prime minister have a right to know when vetting has failed?

I certainly agree the entire vetting process needs reviewing.

I didn’t mean this process was a waste of time, but had the vetting process been different and had the PM been informed (I don’t know if he should or shouldn’t) then we wouldn’t be where we are now.

Fair do ronib. I agree with your last two posts.

Not quite. There’s clearly some problem with the way political appointees become ambassadors. If anything, there needs to be a much tighter vetting process which must fully precede the taking up of the position. It’s not a waste of time but essential. Cossy. Also the vetting body needs to have much more input into the final appointment going ahead. This very waffling situation shouldn’t happen again. Also the chain of command needs clarification. Does the prime minister have a right to know when vetting has failed?

ronib

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.

But, I think we all agree, he should never have been appointed and this is a big fat mess, taking up valuable time that could be spent elsewhere ☹️☹️