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

That’s just a way of saying ‘Even if I’m wrong based on the evidence presented, I will still believe I’m right’, isn’t it?

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Sir Keir Starmer has been in Downing Street for almost two years, but the next 48 hours are expected to be the most crucial in determining the fate of his premiership.

The Prime Minister will face MPs this afternoon (pity I’m out and about so will miss the grilling he will get) to give a statement on the latest twists in the Mandelson scandal, and is unlikely to get an easy ride from either his own side or Opposition MPs

imo - This level of fuss is more about the upcoming elections and opposition parties trying to make their mark

Yes of course its important, but listening to the news around Iran and possible consequences for all of us on prices of everything:

never mind the human cost and moral issues around bombing thousands of innocents waived off as inconsequential.

Get a sense of proportion - it needs sorting, but really its about two things"

one - the upcoming election

two - the troubles Reform especially are facing in terms of recently damaging revelations, greed, and lack of coherent policies on key issues....not to mention Farage would have led us into war with Iran had he been in charge.

I do not share the idea that all will be clear. We will be told stories to cover "backs". That is all I expect but then I have a very jaundiced view of Politics and Politicians.

DD I don’t know why I’m bothering …

I don't know why I do either.

The things that miffs me most of all is that I wasn’t given the precious gift of second sight that so many women on this thread seem to have. If all women were given inbuilt lie detectors we would avoid so much of the trouble in life which is caused by men.

Instead I was given a logical brain which considers facts - which can also be useful for catching men out!

Maremia. I sat and read the FAC report again last night just so the contents are fresh in my memory to compare to what Starmer says today and Robbins tomorrow.

Something isn't right but what is being covered up and by whom isn't clear, which is why Thornberry was and is exasperated by it all.

We shall soon see.

Mollygo

Boz

Starmer could say he wasn't given hard evidence - nothing in writing but,believe me, he would have been received whispered concerns into his ear.
Where does Lammy fit into all this?

I was not told is not the same as ^I didn’t know.^

Could it be a case of "Don't tell me - I don't want to know",

Graphite, I think you could possibly tell at a glance how many have followed tbe link.

Mollygo

Boz

Starmer could say he wasn't given hard evidence - nothing in writing but,believe me, he would have been received whispered concerns into his ear.
Where does Lammy fit into all this?

I was not told is not the same as ^I didn’t know.^

It can be different, but how would he have known if he wasn't told? 😵‍💫

Boz

Starmer could say he wasn't given hard evidence - nothing in writing but,believe me, he would have been received whispered concerns into his ear.
Where does Lammy fit into all this?

I'm confused. Why should anybody believe you?

Boz

Starmer could say he wasn't given hard evidence - nothing in writing but,believe me, he would have been received whispered concerns into his ear.
Where does Lammy fit into all this?

I was not told is not the same as I didn’t know.

That's interesting. How do you know that, Boz? Can you link us up please?

Starmer could say he wasn't given hard evidence - nothing in writing but,believe me, he would have been received whispered concerns into his ear.
Where does Lammy fit into all this?

I don't know why I'm bothering, as there will no doubt be the usual 'roll on the floor laughing' response which just dismisses different opinions with no sensible comment, but I'll give my POV anyway.

There is a difference between lying (ie saying something untrue, such as 'I did not have sex with that woman' and making a promise that circumstances mean you can't keep.

I may be wrong (I don't have the insider information that many on this thread seem to have access to), but I don't think that Starmer is a liar. I can't see him saying that he knew nothing about the vetting situation if he had been told. That would be a lie, and would be wrong, unless there is some undisclosed reason why it was necessary for reasons of national security or something.

To me, supporting a cause such as 50s born women (not the same as WASPI, incidentally) but then finding that there is not enough money to pay out is different. It is disappointing, of course - I do support the cause of women who expected to get their SP at 60, as evidenced by many posts on here - but I don't see it as a lie. If a mother told her children they could have bikes for Christmas but then the boiler broke and there was not enough money to buy them, would people call her a liar? Or someone having to choose priorities for all the family?

It doesn’t matter how much people on TV huff and puff and speculate about this and how many “experts’ give their opinion and report hearsay, the only people who can speak to this are the very senior people who were involved in the process.

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, how many people on this board have bothered the watch the FAC proceedings of 3 November 2025 or read the transcript. Here it is once more:

committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/16673/pdf/

Now that isn’t directly about this current controversy but it is about the process surrounding Mandelson's appointment.

It is also about what happened in the light of new information which was in the new release of Epstein files which prompted Mandelson’s sacking and the timeliness of telling the PM what had come down the wires from the Washington Embassy.

It is also about Mandelson’s failure to appear before the FAC before he took up the post, a process which had been agreed with the FS and had taken place for other ambassadorial appointments.

Wormald and Robbins were both so evasive and obstructive that chair Emily Thornberry came close to losing her cool exclaiming to Robbins You are not making any friends here. Q343 page 30.

The proceedings wrapped up soon after that.

On April 16, Thornberry tweeted,

My committee asked several times whether red flags had been raised by Peter Mandelson's vetting process. It seems there were. Who overrode these concerns? Why were we kept in the dark? People need to stop messing us about and tell us the truth.

Thus Robbins has been called to give further evidence to the FAC tomorrow.

Before that, Starmer will give a Commons statement this afternoon. If he maintains that he was not told knowing that Robbins is due to give evidence which contradicts that then Starmer would have to resign so what would be the point of him lying?

Primrose53

MT62

Doodledog

Oh, and I agree with winterwhite that it seems unlikely that Starmer would lie to parliament - it's not his style.

Really? He’s lied a few times! One example He said we could rip up our council tax bills as it would remain the same- funny ours has gone up.

He also said he would stand by the WASPI women. Mind you, I suppose you could say he stood by and did nothing.

🤣🤣🤣

MT62

Doodledog

Oh, and I agree with winterwhite that it seems unlikely that Starmer would lie to parliament - it's not his style.

Really? He’s lied a few times! One example He said we could rip up our council tax bills as it would remain the same- funny ours has gone up.

This is misinformation, the claim that Labour would freeze council tax was in the local election campaign before the general election and applied to one year only. There is nothing in the Labour manifesto about freezing council tax, Farage is the one who claimed Reform would lower it, anything to say about that?

westendgirl

I am surprised how many posters know the Prime Minister so
intimately that they are qualified to talk about his character using such terms as lying,erring in judgement,lacking in integrity.
I don't know the man personally and am content to look at reliable evidence, which I don't feel is to be found in the right wing press.
Give it a break for goodness sake and put your knitting away.

We don’t, we are just relying on the msm, & other sources of news.
But if I was appointing someone for such important position, as head of government, I would want to know every fiddle f__t about that person being appointed.

Allira

Primrose53

Wow! just watched Susannah Reid and Ed Balls on ITV grilling the Secretary of State for Scotland over Starmer. They did not hold back and both seemed really shocked that he appointed Mandelson and has got this so badly wrong.

I then turned over to GB News and the former Head of MI6 was being interviewed and he explained the different levels of vetting and he was very surprised at how Starmer has handled this.

Interesting.
Ed Balls is, of course, the husband of the Foreign Secretary.

Yes, I was surprised at how much he had to say that was negative about Starmer and I have never seen Susannah so cross and animated towards anybody before. She was like a terrier today!

MT62

Doodledog

Oh, and I agree with winterwhite that it seems unlikely that Starmer would lie to parliament - it's not his style.

Really? He’s lied a few times! One example He said we could rip up our council tax bills as it would remain the same- funny ours has gone up.

He also said he would stand by the WASPI women. Mind you, I suppose you could say he stood by and did nothing.

Doodledog

Oh, and I agree with winterwhite that it seems unlikely that Starmer would lie to parliament - it's not his style.

Really? He’s lied a few times! One example He said we could rip up our council tax bills as it would remain the same- funny ours has gone up.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

That said I don’t believe he has lied
I think he wasn’t informed by Olly Robbins.

Time will tell.

Exactly.

I am surprised how many posters know the Prime Minister so
intimately that they are qualified to talk about his character using such terms as lying,erring in judgement,lacking in integrity.
I don't know the man personally and am content to look at reliable evidence, which I don't feel is to be found in the right wing press.
Give it a break for goodness sake and put your knitting away.

I prefer crochet, is that ok?
Mind you, I really have to concentrate, can't multi-task with a complicated pattern! Otherwise it's 🐸🐸🐸

Have you got your knitting twaddle ? 😁

😂

twaddle

AGAA4

Hung drawn and quartered even before the enquiry. The media is judge, jury and executioner.

With the "tricoteuses" enjoying the show!

And here you are!