As a diplomat who served at the Foreign Office for over a decade, I underwent the highest level of security clearance—the same developed vetting process that former US ambassador Peter Mandelson reportedly failed. This is no mere bureaucratic formality; it is an exhaustive procedure demanding full disclosure of personal secrets that could pose blackmail or extortion risks. Clearance grants access to "Top Secret" government information, making it essential for many diplomatic roles, especially for an ambassador to the United States, our closest intelligence and military ally.
The Unprecedented Vetting Override
The latest revelation in the Mandelson saga is astonishing: security officials denied his clearance, but the Foreign Office unusually overrode this recommendation, allegedly without informing the prime minister. This has sparked uncomfortable questions for Keir Starmer, with Sir Olly Robbins, the permanent under-secretary, set to leave his role after reportedly losing confidence from both the prime minister and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper. Overturning a failed developed vetting decision, made by experienced professionals, is exceptionally rare.
I find it highly implausible that Robbins would make such an unconventional decision—withholding information about Mandelson's vetting failure from superiors—without consulting or informing others. This leads me to suspect that Robbins and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) are being unfairly targeted as fall guys in this scandal.
A Swift Reversal for a Whitehall High-Flyer
For Robbins, his departure after just over a year as head of the Foreign Office marks a rapid decline. Once considered for the cabinet secretary role before losing out to Antonia Romeo, his fortunes have shifted dramatically. Despite my past criticisms of Foreign Office leadership since leaving the Diplomatic Service earlier this year—including concerns over foreign policy direction and departmental operations—I find myself defending Robbins.
I supported his efforts to reduce the bloated headcount of a department that had grown disproportionately to its usefulness. His departure risks stalling these necessary efficiency improvements.
Broader Troubles at the Foreign Office
The Foreign Office has faced significant challenges recently, from the Chagos Islands controversy to being caught off guard by conflicts in Iran. Criticisms range from suffocating bureaucracy hindering geopolitical work to debates over aid spending versus military preparedness. While accountability should extend to officials, it is wrong for politicians to use civil servants as scapegoats to protect themselves.
The political danger Starmer and his former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, risked to appoint Mandelson is baffling. Many in Westminster admired Mandelson's intelligence and political acumen, but Starmer seemed to attribute almost superhuman abilities to him. Perhaps Mandelson convinced Starmer he alone could influence President Trump on issues like the Chagos deal, despite having Dame Karen Pierce, a respected career diplomat, already in place whose term could have been extended.
A Catastrophic Error in Judgment
Regardless of the rationale, appointing Mandelson has proven a catastrophic error for the Prime Minister. The vetting scandal underscores deeper issues within the Foreign Office and raises serious questions about transparency and decision-making at the highest levels of government.
