Sir Keir Starmer has said there was only the “everyday pressure of Government” to clear Lord Peter Mandelson as ambassador to Washington amid the ongoing row over his vetting for the position.
The Prime Minister stood by his decision to sack former Foreign Office chief Sir Olly Robbins and maintained it was wrong for the veteran civil servant not to have told Sir Keir that the peer was cleared against the recommendation of UK Security Vetting (UKSV).
Sir Olly said earlier this week there was an “atmosphere of pressure” and “constant chasing” from Downing Street while the checks were taking place, to which the Prime Minister responded that “no pressure existed whatsoever”.
Speaking to The Sunday Times, he made a distinction between “different types of pressure”.
“There’s pressure – ‘Can we get this done quickly?’ – which is not an unusual pressure. That is the everyday pressure of Government,” he said.
He said a pressure “essentially, to disregard the security vetting element and give clearance” would be something different, and that Sir Olly “was really clear in his mind that wasn’t pressure that was put on him”.
MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee said UK Security Vetting (UKSV), the agency responsible for checks on candidates for sensitive posts, had ticked two red boxes on Lord Mandelson’s form – meaning they had “high concern” and recommended “clearance denied or withdrawn”.
Sir Keir said: “When there’s a double red flag not to give clearance and (showing) high concern, then I’m sorry. I’m sorry.
“But I do not accept the argument that that is something which should not be told to the Prime Minister.”
He said it was a “fundamental matter” to have told him about the vetting, not just at the time of the appointment, but also later on when he was speaking in public saying Lord Mandelson had been given clearance.
Sir Keir rejected a suggestion he could have been more curious about the clearance.
He said: “When I’m told there’s security clearance, should I go back and quiz officials and say: ‘Are you telling me the truth?’”
The Prime Minister said this week that any claims he misled Parliament had been put to bed by Sir Olly’s evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
But questions over the vetting scandal will carry on into next week when Sir Keir’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney is due to appear before the same committee of MPs.
Ian Collard will be giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee in writing.
— Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) April 25, 2026
I have written to the interim Permanent Under Secretary at the Foreign Office setting out the questions we wish Mr Collard to answer. https://t.co/3Qv9e0amyw pic.twitter.com/UlInmpzbfZ
Foreign Office official Ian Collard, who Sir Olly said briefed him on the vetting findings that deemed Lord Mandelson a borderline case and leaned towards recommending that clearance be denied, will give written evidence.
Sir Keir has faced calls to resign amid the fallout from the Lord Peter Mandelson vetting scandal and Cabinet divisions are said to have emerged over his handling of the process, including his decision to sack Sir Olly.
He is also facing further pressure as May’s elections for English councils and the Scottish and Welsh parliaments loom.
YouGov projections this week indicated Labour was on course for disastrous results in its former London and Welsh strongholds.
He told The Sunday Times he would fight the next general election and that he thinks Labour can win.
Meanwhile, polling of Labour members showed that the overwhelmingly majority think Sir Keir has handled the Mandelson affair badly.
However, around two-thirds (61%) think he should not resign over the scandal, while 29% said he should, the Survation poll for Labour List showed.
They were split on whether Labour should change its leadership, with 46% in favour and 44% saying Sir Keir should remain in post.
