UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has accused officials in the Foreign Office of deliberately and repeatedly withholding critical information about the security vetting of Peter Mandelson during his appointment as UK ambassador to the United States.
Speaking to MPs, Starmer said he was only informed last Tuesday that the Foreign Office had overruled advice from security vetting authorities and cleared Mandelson for the diplomatic role despite an initial recommendation against approval.
He said that had he known about the concerns at the time, he would not have proceeded with the appointment.
The controversy centres on Mandelson’s appointment as UK ambassador to the US in December 2024, before full security vetting had been completed. He formally assumed the role on 10 February 2025 but was dismissed seven months later over reported links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The UK security vetting process, carried out by the Cabinet Office agency UK Security Vetting, reportedly recommended on 28 January 2025 that Developed Vetting clearance be denied.
However, Foreign Office officials overruled the recommendation and granted clearance.
Starmer told Parliament that he was not informed of this decision at multiple key points, including when Mandelson was appointed, when he was later removed, and when a review of the vetting process was launched.
He also said senior officials, including then-head of the Civil Service Sir Chris Wormald and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, were not properly briefed during parliamentary scrutiny of the appointment process.
Describing the situation as “absolutely unforgivable,” Starmer said:
“A deliberate decision was taken to withhold that material from me. This was not a lack of asking. This wasn’t an oversight. It was a decision taken not to share that information on repeated occasions.”
He added that it was “frankly staggering” that he had not been informed even when he ordered a review into the vetting process.
The Prime Minister insisted he had not misled Parliament and maintained that ministers must be informed of overall vetting recommendations, even if sensitive personal details remain protected.
The issue has intensified political pressure on Starmer, with Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch calling for his resignation and accusing him of shifting blame onto officials rather than taking responsibility.
Badenoch also criticised Starmer for previously telling MPs that “full due process” had been followed in the appointment, saying he should have corrected the record earlier.
The Ministerial Code requires ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament to resign, while inadvertent errors must be corrected at the earliest opportunity.
The controversy has already led to the removal of senior Foreign Office official Sir Olly Robbins, who is due to give evidence before the Foreign Affairs Committee.
An emergency parliamentary debate on the matter has also been granted, signalling continued political fallout over the handling of the appointment and vetting process.
