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

love0c

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

No.
We’ll find out what we’re allowed to know and we’ll believe it if it suits our narrative.

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

Doesn't that depend on which newspapers are being perused?

Quentin Letts is an appalling fellow. I sometimes have a look at the Daily Mail online to get an inkling of what the right wing are up to. Letts is dreadful.

If Quentin Letts is your considered best commentator, there’s something seriously wrong with judgement. He’s a thoroughly nasty piece of work

Whichever TV station had Quentin Letts must have been somewhat desperate. I'm sure there are many other people whose opinion would be taken more seriously.

Would that be the same Quentin Letts who mocked Andrew Marr after he was disabled by a stroke? - just one of his many repulsive pieces of writing.

Letts is the last person who should be making allegations of low character.

Just scanning through the newspapers and there too, there is little support for KS. Even the Guardian and Observer (leftist papers) say he is unpopular and I didn’t read anything positive from either. Likewise the Telegraph, The Independent, DM etc.

Quentin Letts is on TV now saying very few in the House supported KS, which is how I saw things today. He said the atmosphere was icy today. He says it is a low character point to blame everybody else rather than yourself.

The Daily Mail.

LizzieDrip

At the time of PM’s appointment, Nigel Farage said he thought PM was a ‘very intelligent man’ and his appointment as US ambassador was ‘a good idea’. He offered to work with PM on US trade deals.

Well, exactly. People thought it was a cunning plan at the time.

The degree of fuss is down to elections just round the corner.

I believe Starmer didn't know at that point after plenty of doubts and reading what I can

and the delight in trying to bring him down has little to do with accepting political realities of his initial appointment and all about the right wing press and other parties of wanting to attack at election time

As per ususal.

The crude 'celebration" in the OP says it all, frankly.

It's not justified.

Other parties would have done with an equivalent figure, as in "suitable for Trump".

Maremia

Why was Mandelson appointed?
Perhaps because Trump was difficult to deal with?

No. Birds of a feather flock together.
A true innocent couldn’t have the first idea on how to handle Trump.
One who is practised in the dark arts knows exactly how to deal with him.

Interesting to see the old Labourites, Corbyn and Abbott having a go at KS. MPs from all parties were queuing up to question him and very few were supporting him.

I have flicked through BBC, ITV, GB News and Sky News and there doesn’t seem to be much positive reporting about today’s events. Not one of them has said how KS convinced the House that he is whiter than white and did nothing wrong. Like I said, not much support for him.

Allira

LemonJam

It seemed to me what Starmer today said concurred with the content of the FAC November record of proceedings. Thus I cannot, so far, find and evidence he knowingly mislead Parliament.

DoodleDog- I agree with you. Badenoch and other current detractors reported. o qualms whatsoever about Peter Mandelson's appointment at the time. Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing.

As an aside was good to see the speaker direct Lee Anderson to leave the House for his comments.

Also Zahra Sultana for callling the PM a bare-faced liar and said he was gaslighting the nation 😲
At first she refused to leave saying she had a duty to tell the truth.

Sir Lindsay then held a vote, brought by Government whip Gen Kitchen which said: “I beg to move that Zarah Sultana be suspended from the services of the House.”

MPs voted in favour.

^“Leave, I’m sorry you’ve done this, I really am,” Sir Lindsay said.^

Sultana and Anderson are a match made in heaven. They should join up and call their new party Parliamentary Pea Brains.

MT62

Well we don’t know if he would as he’s not in power (yet)!

Jane43

Well we don’t know if he would as he’s not in power (yet)!

Why was Mandelson appointed?
Perhaps because Trump was difficult to deal with?

As has been explained, some of this info is confidential. ie. may not be shared.

But Starmer would not answer the question asked repeatedly this afternoon:why did he not ask for the result of the vetting?

As he explained very clearly, Mandelson was cleared by the FCDO.

If you are told that someone had passed an exam you don't assume that person has failed.

It is worrying that a forensic barrister was not that curious, though.
Surely he would have been more thorough as Director of Public Prosecutions too?

eazybee

But Starmer would not answer the question asked repeatedly this afternoon:why did he not ask for the result of the vetting?

Not the reasons but simply the result.
He knew Mandelson could not be appointed if he had failed.
Oliver Robbins is sacked.
Starmer stays. Apparently.

Because he couldn’t. I’m not suggesting that he personally couldn’t answer but that all the information the FO has on Mandelson can’t be broadcast to the general public.

petra

knspol

Listening to the Laura K show this morning I was surprised that nobody asked a question about the 2 people in the cabinet office who reportedly knew about failing the security check a month ago but didn't tell Starmer??? (Antonia Romeo head of civil service and Catherine Little cabinet office permanent secretary ) Totally unbelievable that they had this info but didn't pass it on to Starmer.

Knowing what we now know it’s no surprise at all.
They and other civil servants are Gatekeepers of our democracy. What they decide irrespective of which party is in power goes. As has now been shown.

That’s what I had guessed at the beginning of the thread. It’s more worrying than a PM lying in many ways. What else do they not tell ministers about I wonder. Where is Sir Humphrey when you need him?

LemonJam

It seemed to me what Starmer today said concurred with the content of the FAC November record of proceedings. Thus I cannot, so far, find and evidence he knowingly mislead Parliament.

DoodleDog- I agree with you. Badenoch and other current detractors reported. o qualms whatsoever about Peter Mandelson's appointment at the time. Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing.

As an aside was good to see the speaker direct Lee Anderson to leave the House for his comments.

Also Zahra Sultana for callling the PM a bare-faced liar and said he was gaslighting the nation 😲
At first she refused to leave saying she had a duty to tell the truth.

Sir Lindsay then held a vote, brought by Government whip Gen Kitchen which said: “I beg to move that Zarah Sultana be suspended from the services of the House.”

MPs voted in favour.

“Leave, I’m sorry you’ve done this, I really am,” Sir Lindsay said.

But Starmer would not answer the question asked repeatedly this afternoon:why did he not ask for the result of the vetting?

Not the reasons but simply the result.
He knew Mandelson could not be appointed if he had failed.
Oliver Robbins is sacked.
Starmer stays. Apparently.

petra I think you are correct 👍🏻

A point of accuracy - GN is a chat board, N&P is a forum within that board, this is a thread in the N&P forum, and I am writing a post on that thread 😀.

Gransnet is the busiest social networking site for the over 50s. Launched in May 2011, the site has been described by the Telegraph as "a new dawn in grey power".

At its heart is a buzzing forum where users debate the hot topics of the day, support each other through tough times and share a laugh.

Forum - a meeting place.