Sir Olliver Robbins is expected to make his bombshell claims against Starmer on Tuesday (Image: Getty)
Sir Keir Starmer will face accusations of pushing the Foreign Office into approving Lord Mandelson’s appointment despite being personally aware of his friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his business connections to Russia and China.
The bombshell claim is expected to emerge when Sir Oliver Robbins — sacked last week as head of the Foreign Office after failing to inform Starmer that Mandelson had failed his security vetting — appears before the foreign affairs select committee on Tuesday.
Starmer accused Robbins of a cover-up, saying the fact he was not told “beggars belief.” But sources say Robbins will mount a robust defence — with one Whitehall insider predicting his appearance would be “box office” and that he would “not hold back.”
What will Robbins tell the committee?
The Express understands Robbins will reveal he never saw the formal recommendation from UK Security Vetting stating Mandelson should be denied clearance.
Instead he is reported to have received a verbal briefing from the Foreign Office’s security team, describing Mandelson’s case as “borderline” but indicating UKSV would likely oppose clearance if the decision were theirs. Robbins allegedly assessed the outstanding risks and concluded they could be managed.
Read more: Trump piles pressure on embattled Starmer over Mandelson scandal in three words
Read more: Most senior Labour figure so far demands Starmer’s head
He is expected to point to the “prevailing atmosphere” surrounding the appointment — including the fact that Starmer chose to announce Mandelson as US ambassador before security vetting had even been conducted, going against the explicit advice of then cabinet secretary Simon Case, now Lord Case, who had recommended vetting take place first, reports The Times.
Robbins is also expected to highlight that Starmer had pressed ahead despite opposition from Sir Philip Barton, his predecessor as Foreign Office permanent secretary — and despite already knowing about Mandelson’s longstanding friendship with Epstein and potential conflicts of interest over his business dealings.
His central case is understood to rest on the principle that vetting is a confidential process that operates independently of ministers. He will point to a Commons debate in September in which Foreign Office minister Stephen Doughty stated that vetting is “rightly independent of ministers.” Robbins intends to argue that he acted within his authority as permanent secretary and did nothing wrong — and that the role of UKSV is ultimately advisory.
What did Starmer say to MPs?
Ahead of Tuesday’s hearing Starmer took the fight to Robbins in a Commons statement, accusing senior Foreign Office officials of deliberately concealing the vetting failure from him and from parliament.
“A deliberate decision was taken to withhold that material,” the Prime Minister said. “There was not a lack of asking. This wasn’t an oversight. It was a decision. It was a decision taken not to share that information on repeated occasions.”
Starmer said Robbins had withheld the information not only from ministers but also from cabinet secretary Sir Chris Wormald and other Downing Street officials. He said he had directly challenged Robbins over his account and “didn’t accept his explanation”, adding: “That’s why I sacked him.”
The Prime Minister also revealed he had asked the Cabinet Office to review “any security concerns raised” during Mandelson’s tenure as Washington ambassador.
Sir Oliver Robbins is expected to come out against Starmer’s position (Image: Getty)
Were Starmer’s own MPs critical?
Despite his robust defence, Starmer faced stinging criticism from within his own party. Dame Emily Thornberry, Labour chair of the foreign affairs select committee, said that when it came to Mandelson’s appointment, security had ranked as “very much second order” and that “getting Peter Mandelson the job was a priority that overrode everything else.”
Chris Hinchliff, a Labour MP elected in last year’s landslide, said it seemed “wholly incredible” that Robbins would have overruled the vetting agency “on a personal whim.”
He added: “Is it not that it was made because of the political pressure from No 10 to advance a man that a certain faction in the Labour Party have looked to for moral and spiritual leadership for years?”
Two MPs were ejected from the House during the statement. Reform UK’s Lee Anderson was ordered to leave by the Commons Speaker after accusing Starmer of “lying” throughout the scandal. Shortly afterwards, Zarah Sultana of Your Party was also asked to depart after calling the Prime Minister a “barefaced liar.”