I knew nothing
The Guardian newspaper's scoop relating to Mandelson failing the developed vetting process in January 2025 for the position of UK Ambassador to the USA has literally shaken Whitehall and Westminster. Few stories have focused the political world in asking one question- can Starmer survive? Starmer is reaching for the "I wasn't told" card, but this does take plausible deniability to a new level.
Olly must go
The most senior Foreign Office civil servant is being asked to take the hit following these incredible revelations. Starmer is throwing Olly Robbins under a bus for not informing , it would appear, anyone that Mandelson had failed this vetting process. It would appear that at no stage did this most senior of Whitehall mandarins think to inform the PM on the most controversial appointment of the century to the highest diplomatic posting in the world that the candidate had failed the process. This allowed the PM to tell the press pack in February that the procedures had all been followed.
When Kemi Badenoch asked Starmer this question at Prime Minister's Questions on 4th February 2024,
"Can the Prime Minister tell us did the official security vetting he received mention Mandelson's ongoing relationship with the pedophile Jeffery Epstein"
He responded,
"Yes it did"
So officials informed him that there were red flags concerning Mandelson's friendship with Epstein but he was not told, by the way, he failed the vetting. Really?
Did Starmer ever ask anyone as to how the vetting procedure was going? If not, why not?
Did McSweeney never ask? Was Robbins the only person who was informed of the decision? Why was Mandelson allowed to keep his clearance after failing the vetting process.
In the letter to Emily Thornberry , the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, signed by Yvette Cooper and Olly Robbins, why did they write,
"Peter Mandelson's security vetting was conducted to the usual standard set for developed vetting in line with established Cabinet Office policy" and then continued to say, the process "concluded with developed vetting clearance being granted by the F.C.D.O. in advance of Lord Mandelson taking up his post in February"
We are led to believe that at no stage did Olly Robbins say to the Foreign Secretary or the PM that he had over ruled the outcome of the vetting process, or that Mandelson had failed the vetting procedure. We are also led to believe that at no time was the PM sufficiently curious to ask if Mandelson had failed the process even though he was told that there was an ongoing relationship between Mandelson and Epstein as a result of the vetting process.
We have to remember that this appointment was controversial to begin with attracting worldwide coverage. It begs questions as to why Starmer did not come to the House of Commons on Wednesday at the latest to inform the House of the revelations we are led to believe he first learnt of the day before. We are led to believe that Lammy first learnt of the vetting rejection by reading it in The Guardian Thursday.
The procedure for correcting the record is quite formal and any member who has misled the Commons must come and correct the record at the first possible opportunity. No wonder Starmer was so testy when he left the Commons chamber after PMQs, banging the Speakers chair following Sir Lindsay's rebuke of Starmer for not focusing on the questions he was facing. To think, he went through the entire PMQs that day knowing that some newspaper were likely to have the scoop of the century.
It is little wonder that the Government wanted to be in charge of what papers were being released to the public in relation to Mandelson's appointment. Kemi Badenochs humble address soon put a stop to that. Angela Rayner, already on manoeuvres , will be back on exercise as this already huge story grows with further revelations over the next few days including the Sunday papers. Supporters of other potential candidates will spend the weekend sharpening their knives .Many of the MPs will take a battering on the doorstep as they canvass for the local elections. They will not be happy bunnies coming back to Westminster Monday.
Monday Starmer will make a statement concerning the vetting rejection but this will not be enough. I'm sure this is Standing Order 24 territory and a full 3 hour debate could be had as early as Tuesday. Normally these debates are not on a substantive motion, but this will be massively damaging for Starmer particularly if more Labour MPs start to put their heads above the parapet.
PARIS?
The PM is going to Paris today, and I suspect visions of Margaret Thatcher being "handbagged" by John Sergeant and a mob of baying journalists will spring to mind. It was there that the public witnessed the authority draining from her for the first time.
How serious is this? It doesn't get any worse. I can best sum it up with the anonymous quote in today's Times from a Government Minister,...
"This is a tipping point. There can be no more excuses, we're past apologies and there cannot be another fall person in the form of Olly Robbins.
Well, Sir Olly was the fall guy in the Mandelson never ending saga. Sir Olly has been thrown under the bus, but not only is the Prime Minister running out of busses, he must ,by now, be running out of people to throw under them.
Nigel Evans
16th April 2026