Starmer accused of covering up Mandelson vetting scandal

Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of a “cover-up” over the Mandelson vetting scandal in an attempt to save his premiership.

The Prime Minister has insisted that nobody in Downing Street was aware that Lord Mandelson was made US ambassador despite failing security vetting.

However, opponents have questioned his defence after it emerged that his Cabinet Secretary and other senior officials were aware of the decision for weeks before it was made public.

Sir Keir sacked Sir Olly Robbins, his Foreign Office chief, for not flagging the security concerns over Lord Mandelson, but gave his full backing to Dame Antonia Romeo, his most senior civil servant who also failed to tell him.

Allies of Sir Olly have suggested that the Prime Minister does not want to sack yet another senior figure over the Mandelson scandal after losing Sir Chris Wormald, his former Cabinet secretary, and Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff, in the fallout.

Sir Keir is determined to hold on to the Labour leadership despite mounting pressure over the Mandelson scandal and potential challengers looming before what is expected to be a disastrous result in May’s local elections.

Downing Street was forced to deny claims that emerged on Saturday night that it was made aware of the risks associated with appointing Lord Mandelson as US ambassador early in the vetting process.

Sir Keir, who will face MPs for the first time on Monday since the latest scandal broke, is coming under mounting pressure to explain who in his inner circle knew what and when.

Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, said: “On Friday Keir Starmer said no one in No 10 knew about Mandelson’s failed vetting. Yet we now know the most senior civil servants in the country, including his principal policy adviser who is in and out of Downing Street every day, did know.

“It’s astonishing neither told the Prime Minister. He’s either lying to us or he’s lost control of his office to an extent he is unfit to govern.

“From the outset of the Mandelson scandal, Starmer’s first instinct has been to evade, deflect and cover up. Enough is enough. The country deserves so much better. Starmer should resign.”

Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, said: “The Prime Minister must resign this week. Keir Starmer cannot say Peter Mandelson passed security vetting and later claim he wasn’t told. Now we know Romeo has known for weeks too, it’s clear there has been an attempted cover-up.

“Starmer had misled Parliament and lied to the public – it’s outright, blatant dishonesty. Enough is enough. He has to go.”

On Saturday night, a Downing Street source challenged Sir Keir’s opponents to provide evidence to back up suggestions of a cover-up.

Sir Keir is also facing pressure from his own party over the crisis.

Supporters of Andy Burnham, who many consider a potential future Labour leader, are reportedly hoping to seize control of the party’s National Executive Committee – which denied him a seat earlier this year – to open a new route for the Mayor of Greater Manchester to return to Westminster.

Mr Burnham’s allies are said to be looking at ways of gaining a foothold on the ruling body, which is currently made up of Starmer loyalists, after the local elections – unless the Prime Minister is forced to resign beforehand.

Meanwhile, it emerged that Angela Rayner and Mr Burnham held a secret meeting on Friday night, with Mr Burnham pictured arriving at the former deputy Prime Minister’s house in a silver Mercedes.

Ms Rayner is widely believed to be preparing a bid to run as leader, although she would not launch this until HMRC has completed its investigation into her tax affairs. The meeting will set alarm bells ringing in Downing Street about a possible alliance between the two Labour heavyweights.

The Prime Minister’s spokesman has insisted that until last Tuesday, “nobody in No 10” had been told about Lord Mandelson’s failed security vetting, adding: “Nobody – No 10 officials or otherwise – had this information.”

But it subsequently emerged that Dame Antonia – who was appointed Cabinet Secretary in February – was informed of the crucial document in late March after Cat Little, the top mandarin in the Cabinet Office, came across it.

Ms Little’s department is overseeing the process of complying with a “humble address” motion put forward by the Conservatives under which the Government is compelled to release “all papers” relevant to Lord Mandelson’s appointment.

The pair did not immediately share what they found with the Prime Minister, instead consulting up to a dozen other lawyers and officials for advice.

Security vetting files are seen in the Civil Service as deeply sensitive and are only shared with a very limited group of people, often only the vetting team and the hiring manager.

No 10 has denied reports that the pair kept the Prime Minister “in the dark”, arguing that they were taking the time to seek procedural and legal advice before informing Sir Keir.

An ally of Sir Olly told The Telegraph that No 10 would be reluctant to lose Dame Antonia over the row. They said: “Obviously the PM is much more invested in Antonia’s appointment than he was in Olly’s position. He can’t fire Antonia – he has already had the shortest end-to-end Cabinet Secretary in history.”

A Whitehall source hit back, saying: “This is a desperate and ridiculous attempt to deflect blame from the person who didn’t tell PM to the person who did.”

The Prime Minister was only told that Lord Mandelson had failed the vetting process on Tuesday by the Cabinet Secretary in a crisis meeting after which a memo was sent to Downing Street officials.

The note, sent from one of Sir Keir’s top aides following a meeting on Tuesday, revealed that the Prime Minister backed plans to establish the facts around Lord Mandelson’s security clearance “urgently” to clarify whether he had “inadvertently misled Parliament”.

Dan York-Smith, the Prime Minister’s principal private secretary, said in the memo: “Our advice to the PM was that further fact finding was required, to understand the FCDO decision making process and reasons for granting clearance and to determine whether ministers, having been provided (incorrectly) with assurances about the process, had inadvertently misled Parliament when commenting on the process which had been followed.”

Sir Keir’s top aides are locked in crisis talks over whether he needs to acknowledge that he misled the House of Commons when he makes a statement to Parliament on Monday.

The Prime Minister is understood to acknowledge that he did not give MPs the “full picture” on Lord Mandelson’s appointment, but has not yet admitted that he misled the House.

“The PM clearly feels that he wasn’t given the full picture so therefore wasn’t able to give Parliament the full picture,” a Downing Street source said.

Misleading the House would constitute a breach of the ministerial code, something he has repeatedly called for ministers to resign over.

Amber Rudd resigned as Home Secretary in 2018 after she “inadvertently misled” the committee in breach of the ministerial code by making an incorrect claim about deportation.

It is understood that Sir Keir will use his statement to insist that No 10 was not made aware that security officials had recommended that Lord Mandelson should not have access to secret materials.

Meanwhile, Sir Olly is due to give evidence to MPs on Tuesday, when it is understood he will argue that by keeping ministers out of the vetting process, he was complying with the law.

The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, which was introduced by the former Labour government, states that secretaries of state “do not cover national security vetting” and “do not affect any power relating to national security vetting”.

No 10 ‘wanted a scalp’

One of Sir Olly’s predecessors said he had been “thrown under the bus” by the Prime Minister, who wanted to blame someone for the Lord Mandelson vetting fiasco.

Lord McDonald of Salford, the former permanent secretary in the Foreign Office, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that No 10 “wanted a scalp and they wanted it quickly”.

On Saturday, the Spectator also reported that during the early stages of Lord Mandelson’s vetting process, which consisted of due diligence and propriety checks, certain red flags were raised and mitigations put in place – all of which was done with Downing Street’s approval.

The risks were related to his lobbying company Global Counsel, and it was agreed that his deputy in Washington would have knowledge of or supervise contact with any former clients he would meet following his appointment as US ambassador.

After red flags were raised by officials, it was claimed that No 10 agreed to a package of measures being put in place to mitigate the risks. Downing Street denied that it had agreed to this.

Sir Keir has been urged to “come clean” and publish the advice he received on Lord Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador to the US before his Commons appearance on Monday.

Sir Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: “No more ministers hiding behind process and dragging their feet – the public deserve full transparency now.”

A second tranche of potentially damaging documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment is due to be released by the Cabinet Office.

Downing Street sources say they want the files to be published as soon as possible – although The Telegraph understands it is unlikely to happen before the local elections.

Whitehall sources again blamed the Foreign Office for delays, with one saying: “The bit of Government that has been most difficult to get stuff from is the Foreign Office, who have been quite obstructive from the start – which has raised suspicion on whether they were hiding something.”

A Downing Street source said: “No10 only became aware this week that UK Security Vetting had recommended against developed vetting. Anyone suggesting otherwise needs to provide evidence.”

[Source: Daily Telegraph]