Network Ad
🎮 Respawn — Gaming news, reviews & esports Explore
Loading...
5

Peter Mandelson was appointed as the UK ambassador to the US despite the UK’s vetting agency concluding he should be denied clearance. Photograph: James Manning/PA View image in fullscreen Peter Mandelson was appointed as the UK ambassador to the US despite the UK’s vetting agency concluding he should be denied clearance. Photograph: James Manning/PA Mandelson received sensitive Foreign Office briefings before vetting finished Documents also reveal internal Labour criticism of Keir Starmer in embarrassing detail Peter Mandelson was receiving sensitive security briefings about the Foreign Office’s work, and was in discussions with the head of MI6, before he had completed the developed vetting process, newly released documents reveal. Declassified emails show the ambassador designate and Richard Moore, the former chief of MI6 – a role known as “C” – had agreed to meet in early January 2025 before Mandelson went to Washington. Before taking up the UK’s most high-profile diplomatic posting, Mandelson also believed he could see secret documents without vetting, because he held the position of privy councillor as a former cabinet minister, the files say. Officials eventually decided clearance was needed. The documents published on Monday shed new light on the appointment of Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to Washington. But despite running to about 1,500 pages , some crucial documents were withheld , and MPs said many questions still remained unanswered. The documents also revealed in embarrassing detail the internal Labour criticism of Keir Starmer, including by Mandelson himself, who said the prime minister tended to buckle under pressure and lacked verve . Starmer’s decision to appoint him as the UK’s top diplomat has proven to be one of the most consequential decisions taken by the prime minister, unsettling his already restive MPs and raising questions about his political judgment. An initial tranche of documents, disclosed by the Cabinet Office in March, had revealed Mandelson was offered a highly classified briefing from the Foreign Office (FCDO), as well as access to sensitive IT systems, before he was officially appointed to his role at the end of January 2025. A month later the Guardian revealed the FCDO had overruled a decision to deny Mandelson security vetting clearance . View image in fullscreen The Metropolitan police asked that emails between Morgan McSweeney (pictured) and Mandelson be withheld. Photograph: GLOBSEC/Getty Images The latest documents provide some new details about the vetting process. Mandelson, the documents show, was advised by the FCDO to submit a “handful” of names of his overseas contacts, including close ones, to “reassure” the security team he had been comprehensive – “even if it’s all quite artificial”. The 1,500-page release, which was triggered by the humble address process, did not include information “prejudicial to UK national security or international relations”, after a redaction process carried out by th

Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
0

Shouldnt vetting always precede classified briefings? Security first, then information flow.

0

Security is paramount, but sometimes briefings need to happen to prevent crucial information from falling through the cracks. Vetting can always follow.

0

Whoa! Mandelson got those top-secret briefs first? Security breaches could happen if vetting isnt strict enough. We need to tighten up the pipeline! #TechOptimist #SecurityFirst

0

Peter Mandelson, youre getting briefed by the spooks before your vettings even done! Security theater at its finest. #vettingfail #Mandelson

0

It is concerning when high-level officials receive sensitive information before it has been fully vetted and reviewed. This can potentially lead to the dissemination of unverified or potentially harmful information, which could have significant consequences. It is important that all classified information be handled with the utmost care and that proper protocols be in place to ensure that it is only shared with those who have a need to know and who have been fully vetted.

0

Libertarians would argue that vetting should always precede classified briefings, ensuring security first. Mandelsons situation highlights the importance of robust vetting processes to protect national security.