Keir Starmer said he is ‘frankly staggered’ he was not told Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting – here are the key points from his more than two-hour long Commons statement
Keir Starmer has told MPs he is “frankly staggered” that he was not told Peter Mandelson hadn’t passed security vetting.
In a statement lasting more than two hours in the Commons, the PM said the sequence of events leading to this “beggars belief” as he expressed his anger and frustration at officials in the Foreign Office for not keeping him informed.
The PM said he would not have proceeded with the appointment of Lord Mandelson if he had known UK Security Vetting (UKSV), the agency responsible for conducting assessments, had declined to approve the peer.
He told the chamber he has stripped the Foreign Office of its powers to overrule vetting decisions and has ordered an extensive review into how security vetting decisions are made.
The Mirror looks back at some of the key points from the statement.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer watch LIVE: PM lashes out in heated Mandelson grilling as furious MP kicked out1. Beggars belief
Keir Starmer told MPs there was “deliberate decision” taken on “repeated occasions” not to tell him about Lord Peter Mandelson’s failure to pass security vetting. And he said the process that led to senior politicians and officials not being told about the security vetting status of Lord Mandelson “beggars belief”.
He told MPs: “I know many members across the House will find these facts to be incredible, and to that I can only say that they are right. It beggars belief that throughout the whole timeline of events, officials in the Foreign Office saw fit to withhold this information from the most senior ministers in our system of government.“That is not how the vast majority of people in this country expects politics, government or accountability to work, and I do not think it’s how most public servants think it should work.”
2. Review into security vetting
Keir Starmer said he was “frankly staggered” about not being told about UK Security Vetting (UKSV) recommending that Lord Peter Mandelson not be given developed vetting clearance.The Prime Minister said he has stripped the Foreign Office of its powers to overrule vetting decisions and has appointed Sir Adrian Fulford to lead a review into how security vetting decisions are made.
Mr Starmer said: “I do not accept that I could not have been told about UKSV’s denial of security vetting before Peter Mandelson took up his post in January 2025. I do not accept that the then-cabinet secretary could not have been told in September 2025 when he carried out his review into the process.
“I do not accept that the Foreign Secretary could not have been told when making statements to the select committee, again in 2025. But on top of that the fact that I was not told even when I ordered a review of the UKSV process, is frankly staggering, and I can tell the House that I’ve now updated the terms of reference for the review into security vetting to make sure it covers the means by which all decisions are made in relation to national security vetting.”
3. Heat from Labour MPs
Keir Starmer faced heat from left-wing MPs in the chamber during the statement – including Labour figures.
Veteran MP Diane Abbott, who does not currently have the Labour whip and is the longest-serving female MP, criticised Mr Starmer for talking at length about “process and procedure”. She continued: “Ordinary people don’t really care about process and procedure. They want transparency and they want to know that they can have confidence in the words of elected politicians… It’s one thing to say, as he insists on saying, nobody told me, nobody told me anything, nobody told me. The question is, why didn’t the Prime Minister ask?”
Left-wing Labour MP John McDonnell said many Labour MPs are “bewildered” that Lord Mandelson was appointed in the first place. He hit out at the Prime Minister’s former official Morgan McSweeney, who had a close relationship with Lord Mandelson. “What Mandelson wants, Mandelson gets,” Mr McDonnell said. He was heckled by members of the Cabinet as he spoke.
Other Labour backbenchers queried why politicians were not told about Lord Mandelson’s vetting. Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) said: “Many of my constituents are rightly concerned to learn that not a single democratically elected official in Government was informed.” His comments were echoed by his colleague Rachel Blake.
4. Starmer faces demands to quit
The PM faced a blistering attack from Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey, who called on him to quit.
He told MPs “the only decent thing” for Mr Starmer to do “is to take responsibility”. And in a brutal insult, he compared Mr Starmer to Boris Johnson, saying: “Back in 2022, the Prime Minister rightly accused Boris Johnson of expecting others to take the blame while he clung on. That was not acceptable then, and it’s not acceptable now.”
He continued: “After the years of chaos under the Conservatives, we needed a government focused on the interests of the people, the cost of living crisis, the health and care crisis, our national security. We needed a government honesty, integrity and accountability. So will the Prime Minister finally accept that the only way he can help to deliver that is to resign?”
Mr Starmer responded he was told “the process was as it should have been” when the Bloomberg emails came to light, adding: “When I asked the former cabinet secretary to review the process after September 25, he specifically addressed whether the process had been followed by referencing the Simon Case letter, and assured me that the process was the right process to have followed.”
5. Suggestion Mandelson leaked own appointment
The chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee has suggested that Mandelson could have leaked his appointment to “bounce” the Government.
Dame Emily Thornberry said: “A month before Mandelson’s appointment was announced, the then-Cabinet Secretary advised that the necessary security clearance should be acquired before confirming a political appointment.
“That doesn’t seem to have been the usual practice. I’m glad that it’s changed because it was clearly abused, because what happened was that somebody, probably Peter Mandelson himself, leaked to the press his appointment as US ambassador, effectively bouncing the government into confirming it.”
6. Apology to Epstein victims
Mr Starmer has long faced pressure for his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as Britain’s Ambassador to the US given the Labour grandee’s long reported links to Jeffrey Epstein.
Lord Mandelson was sacked from the role in September after new information came to light about the pair’s relationship in the Epstein files released by the US government.
During the debate, multiple MPs told the PM he shouldn’t have appointed Lord Mandelson in the first place due to his Epstein links. Mr Starmer told MPs today: “At the heart of this, there is also a judgment I made that was wrong. I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson.
“I take responsibility for that decision, and I apologise again to the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who were clearly failed by my decision.”
7. Normal to appoint before security vetting
Keir Starmer has reiterated that it was “usual” for security vetting to take place following an appointment.In a statement to the Commons, the Prime Minister said: “I want to make clear to the House that for a direct ministerial appointment, it was usual for security vetting to happen after the appointment, but before starting in post, that was the process in place at the time. This was confirmed by the former cabinet secretary, Sir Chris Wormald at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on the 3rd of November 2025, when he gave evidence.“Sir Chris made clear, I’m quoting him now, ‘when we are making appointments from outside the Civil Service, the normal thing is for security clearance to happen after appointment, but before the person signs a contract and takes up post’.” He continued: “After I sacked Peter Mandelson I changed that process so that now an appointment cannot be announced until after security vetting is passed.”
8. PM rejects Olly Robbins explanation
Mr Starmer has said he did not accept Sir Olly Robbin’s explanation – which led to his sacking last week. The PM said former Foreign Office chief Sir Olly did not tell him the recommendation of United Kingdom Security Vetting (UKSV) because he did not believe he was allowed to.
The PM told MPs: “He (Sir Olly) should have provided this information to me, and he could have provided it to me. He’s giving evidence tomorrow, but I can say to the House that, when I spoke to him on Thursday, his view to me was that he couldn’t provide this information to me, because he wasn’t allowed to provide information to me.
“I don’t want to put words in his mouth, because it’s very important he gives his own evidence.”
The Prime Minister added: “What he (Sir Olly) said to me was, essentially, that he took the view that this process did not allow him to disclose to me the recommendation of UKSV. No doubt he’ll be asked further questions about that. That is the reason that he gave to me.” Mr Starmer said he “did not accept his explanation”.
9. PM unable to say if Mandelson-style appointments made
Keir Starmer was unable to say whether there are any other Mandelson-style political appointments to the Foreign Office.
Lib Dem MP Edward Morello pressed him to find out if it was a one-off. He asked: “This entire sorry episode is the direct result of his decision to make a direct appointment to one of the most senior roles in the FCDO of somebody who was wholly inappropriate for the role.
“So can the Prime Minister at least confirm to the House that this was a singular error of judgment, and that his No10 operation has not proposed political appointee for any other senior role in the FCDO?”
Mr Starmer responded: “There are very many appointments… and I will just check that for him.”
10. Two MPs kicked out after accusing PM of lying
Lee Anderson and Zarah Sultana were kicked out of the Commons after accusing Keir Starmer of lying during the debate.
Reform UK MP Mr Anderson told Mr Starmer: “The problem the Prime Minister’s got is no one believes him. The public don’t believe him, the MPs on this side of the House don’t believe him, his own gullible backbenchers don’t believe him. So does the Prime Minister agree with me? He’s been lying.”
Later, Your Party MP Zarah Sultana was also ordered out of the chamber after calling Mr Starmer a liar. A furious Ms Sultana, who used to sit on the Labour benches, said: “He (Mr Starmer) is gaslighting the nation. So let’s call this out for what it is. The Prime Minister is a barefaced liar.”
Sir Lindsay Hoyle told the MPs to leave the chambers on each of the occasions.
On social media, Labour MP Jacob Collier said: “Two MPs kicked out of the Chamber for unparliamentary behaviour, purely so they can put a clip on social media for their supporters. Appalling conduct.”
Source link
