Sacked Foreign Office Chief Defends Mandelson Security Clearance Decision
Former Foreign Office chief Sir Olly Robbins has defended his actions in granting Lord Mandelson security clearance, telling MPs there was a "dismissive approach" from Downing Street with an "atmosphere of pressure" to push the appointment through. Sir Olly was dismissed by Prime Minister Keir Starmer last week for not disclosing that Lord Mandelson had initially failed security checks but was nevertheless granted developed vetting clearance by the Foreign Office.
Vetting Process Under Scrutiny
Appearing before the Foreign Affairs Committee, Sir Olly insisted that only the final outcome of the vetting process should be shared with ministers, rather than the concerns raised during the assessment. The Whitehall veteran stated he does not "fully understand" the reasons for his dismissal and is "desperately sad" about it.
The initial announcement that Lord Mandelson would become UK ambassador to Washington was made before Sir Olly took up his role as permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office in January 2025. By that time, the process of clearing the peer was already well underway, with questions from the Cabinet Office about whether formal vetting was even necessary given his status as a member of the House of Lords and a privy counsellor.
Pressure From Number Ten
When Sir Olly assumed his position on January 20, Lord Mandelson had already:
- Completed the Cabinet Office's "due diligence" process
- Received approval from the King
- Obtained agreement from the United States
- Been granted building access
- Received "highly classified briefings" on a case-by-case basis
Sir Olly told MPs that all these factors "resulted in a dismissive attitude to developed vetting" from Number Ten, but despite this atmosphere of pressure, he insisted Foreign Office civil servants carried out the process normally.
"I was very conscious that if we went through the rigour of our process and decided against granting clearance that would have caused a real problem for the Government and a problem for the country," Sir Olly testified. "I was conscious of that without letting it influence my judgment."
Security Concerns and Recommendations
MPs revealed that UK Security Vetting had ticked two red boxes on Lord Mandelson's form, indicating "high concern" and recommending "clearance denied or withdrawn." Sir Olly said he never saw that specific form but was briefed by Foreign Office security staff that UKSV considered Mandelson a borderline case leaning toward denial.
He emphasized that the risks identified did not relate to Lord Mandelson's association with convicted paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. "I was told that UKSV acknowledged that the Foreign Office might wish to grant clearance with appropriate risk management," Sir Olly explained.
Political Fallout and Legal Implications
During the two-and-a-half hour session, Sir Olly made several significant revelations:
- The normal vetting process only occurred because the Foreign Office "put its foot down" after Cabinet Office suggestions it was unnecessary
- Dropping Lord Mandelson as the Washington nominee would have created "quite an issue" with Donald Trump's incoming administration in January 2025
- Number Ten had considered finding an ambassadorial post for Sir Keir's former communications chief Lord Matthew Doyle
Prime Minister Starmer challenged Sir Olly about why he went against UKSV's recommendation, stating: "I did ask him and I didn't accept his explanation. That's why I sacked him."
Sir Olly countered that the confidentiality of vetting processes is "designed to protect UK national security." He received his formal dismissal letter on Monday and has "sought advice" on it, potentially setting the stage for a legal battle.
"I don't fully understand the reasons that I'm in the position I am in," Sir Olly told MPs. "As a human being, I'm desperately, desperately sad about it."
Opposition Criticism
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch claimed Sir Olly's evidence showed the Prime Minister had misled Parliament. "The evidence from Olly Robbins is devastating to Keir Starmer," she stated. "It is clear that No 10 not only made the appointment before vetting was completed, but that Mandelson was already acting as the ambassador before the vetting."
Badenoch added: "With this, and the 'constant pressure' No 10 applied to the appointment and their 'dismissive attitude' to vetting Mandelson, it is now absolutely clear that full due process was not followed. Keir Starmer has misled the House."
