By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
"Revealed: Mandelson failed vetting but Foreign Office overruled decision
Guardian investigation uncovers decision by UK security officials to deny clearance before Mandelson took up role as US ambassador"
It calls into question the following.
"Ministers and officials are now likely to be pressed over whether they have been fully transparent about the process that led to his appointment.
At a press conference in Hastings on 5 February, Starmer responded to a question from a journalist by saying there had been “security vetting, carried out independently by the security services, which is an intensive exercise that gave him [Mandelson] clearance for the role. You have to go through that before you take up the post.” He added: “Clearly both the due diligence and the security vetting need to be looked at again.”
This appeared to partly put the blame for Mandelson’s appointment on the failure of a vetting process which, according to sources, his government had overruled."
On top of all that Rayner isn't in the clear to challenge, and Streeting has close links to Mandelson. And the right of the party know that someone from their wing (such as Mahmood) won't cut it with the membership, and also despise Rayner.
Still, I suppose it goes to show the advantage of a friend in high places. I underwent developed vetting nearly 40 years ago, and had I failed, I would have been out on my ass.
[Post edited 16 Apr 16:43]
0
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 16:43 - Apr 16 with 2265 views
In fairness to Starmer I can't really see how he was meant to foresee that someone with the nickname the Prince of Darkness might not be an entirely controversy-free appointment.
I find it astonishing that people in such positions of power can be so monumentally stupid. Did they never consider that in this day and age all of this would come out at some point?
Who ever would have thought that the "Prince of Darkness" might have a few skeletons in the closet?
[Post edited 16 Apr 16:59]
1
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 16:54 - Apr 16 with 2193 views
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 16:52 - Apr 16 by Blueschev
I find it astonishing that people in such positions of power can be so monumentally stupid. Did they never consider that in this day and age all of this would come out at some point?
Who ever would have thought that the "Prince of Darkness" might have a few skeletons in the closet?
[Post edited 16 Apr 16:59]
I often think people in power are more likely to land in these situations. It's not stupidity, it's carelessness, overdelegation or occasionally overconfidence/arrogance.
I am always amazed that everytime something goes wrong in gvmt, the assumption is that the prime minister should have known / did know etc.
Anyone who has worked in a large organisation at mid to senior levels knows only so much, and depends on those working for them on doing the right thing. Often they make mistakes or errors of judgement, and only then do you start to uncover the scale of issues etc.
I'm not making excuses for Starmer in particular but I imagine that running a country is quite challenging.
However, having said all of the above - with any sniff of Epstein engagement you would have expected an ultra ultra cautious approach - this to me stinks of a mix of carelessness and overdelegation with a helping of arrogance on the side rather than stupidity.
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 17:04 - Apr 16 by Blueschev
I don't really get why they despise him, he's very much a centrist. Maybe because he cannot be manipulated by them?
I'm currently reading The Fraud on your recommendation. Quite draw dropping stuff to say the least.
Yes, it's a damning indictment of the McSweeney/Labour Togetherr/Starmer project which unsurprisingly got no coverage in the mainstream media when the corruption and factionalism involved should have been shouted to the rooftops.
And with the demise of McSweeney, and the resignation of Josh Simon, it has sadly disappeared into the ether.
For my own part, I have a particular interest in what is said about Euan Phillips (or to use his alias, David Gordstein).
He was a member of our local party and I remember delivering leaflets with him when he mentioned that he had been in touch with others in the party elsewhere about a campaign against Corbyn. Little did I know at the time what it would turn out to be!
[Post edited 17 Apr 8:58]
0
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 17:36 - Apr 16 with 1924 views
why were they vetting him a month and a half after he had been appointed? isn't that in itself a bit odd?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 17:41 - Apr 16 with 1894 views
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 17:25 - Apr 16 by bsw72
I often think people in power are more likely to land in these situations. It's not stupidity, it's carelessness, overdelegation or occasionally overconfidence/arrogance.
I am always amazed that everytime something goes wrong in gvmt, the assumption is that the prime minister should have known / did know etc.
Anyone who has worked in a large organisation at mid to senior levels knows only so much, and depends on those working for them on doing the right thing. Often they make mistakes or errors of judgement, and only then do you start to uncover the scale of issues etc.
I'm not making excuses for Starmer in particular but I imagine that running a country is quite challenging.
However, having said all of the above - with any sniff of Epstein engagement you would have expected an ultra ultra cautious approach - this to me stinks of a mix of carelessness and overdelegation with a helping of arrogance on the side rather than stupidity.
Everything here gets easier to understand once you appreciate that Starmer didn't appoint Mandelson. Mandelson appointed Starmer.
-1
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 18:17 - Apr 16 with 1698 views
I turned on Sky News at 5 expecting this to be the main item, but thus far it has only got a couple of minutes' coverage given the news about Lebanon.
No doubt this will help Labour to obfuscate, as they have done up to now, but it doesn't reflect well on Starmer who as a lawyer should be concerned about process.
If Starmer were a mere minister, I think he would have been gone long before now.
EDIT: the Cabinet Office have confirmed the Guardian story, but efforts now appear to be aimed at blaming the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office. Blaming the civil service doesn't reflect well on Starmer, a former civil servant but he has form.
"Prospect, the union which represents civil servants working at UK Security Vetting (UKSV), says No 10 was wrong to allow people to think that vetting was not carried out properly.
In a statement, the union’s general secretary, Mike Clancy, said:
It is deeply unfortunate that following the resignation of Morgan McSweeney Downing Street allowed the impression to circulate that the vetting of Peter Mandelson had not been done correctly by UK Security Vetting.
Not only were UKSV put in an invidious position by being asking to conduct vetting after an appointment had been announced, but now deeply troubling reports have appeared in the media claiming that UKSV advice was overruled.
Civil Servants, particularly those working in the most sensitive parts of government cannot speak publicly, and deserve ministers to take responsibility for the decisions they take and not to seek to deflect blame onto them."
[Post edited 16 Apr 18:34]
0
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 18:30 - Apr 16 with 1616 views
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 18:17 - Apr 16 by positivity
wow, mandelson must have been busy fabricating every one of those 200,000 leadership election votes!
I was one of those 200,000 but it is clear that people who voted for him were misled because Starmer went back on virtually all his pledges, and the party moved dramatically to the right.
Margaret Hodge was interviewed by the FT during the leadership campaign and said this of Starmer. "He's triangulating like mad. Somebody said to me, I don't mind what he does so long as he wins, he beats Rebecca Long-Bailey. And I thought Tony [Blair] never did that. Tony was completely straight, completely honest. So is Keir lying to get the job? And will he then change? That's what this person was saying to me as way of promoting Keir."
[Post edited 16 Apr 18:49]
4
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 18:48 - Apr 16 with 1533 views
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 17:36 - Apr 16 by DJR
Yes, it's a damning indictment of the McSweeney/Labour Togetherr/Starmer project which unsurprisingly got no coverage in the mainstream media when the corruption and factionalism involved should have been shouted to the rooftops.
And with the demise of McSweeney, and the resignation of Josh Simon, it has sadly disappeared into the ether.
For my own part, I have a particular interest in what is said about Euan Phillips (or to use his alias, David Gordstein).
He was a member of our local party and I remember delivering leaflets with him when he mentioned that he had been in touch with others in the party elsewhere about a campaign against Corbyn. Little did I know at the time what it would turn out to be!
[Post edited 17 Apr 8:58]
I know people within the Labour Party who disliked Corbyn, but are now vehemently against Starmer because of what he and the McSweeny axis have done and the authoritarian way they have behaved towards other factions.
Starmer and Labour are in a pickle on 18:48 - Apr 16 by bsw72
Flying rodent eh? With over 1000 followers. Must be true.
As he himself readily admits, he's just an oaf from Fife, but he's got everything right in the last 10 years whilst the commentariat have made an utter arse of themselves.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
I underwent developed vetting nearly 40 years ago, and had I failed, I would have been out on my ass. 
