Top
Foreign Office official ‘felt pressure’ for ‘rapid outcome’ on Mandelson
vetting
Ian
Collard tells MPs he had not seen UKSV assessment summary before briefing Olly
Robbins on clearance
Henry
Dyer
Mon 27
Apr 2026 21.06 BST
A top
Foreign Office security official who played a key role in granting Peter
Mandelson’s vetting clearance “felt pressure to deliver a rapid outcome”
because of contacts from Downing Street, MPs have been told.
In
testimony relayed to parliament via the Foreign Office (FCDO), Ian Collard said
he had not seen the assessment summary produced by the vetting agency when he
gave an oral briefing to Olly Robbins, the department’s former permanent
secretary. Instead, Collard had received an oral briefing from a member of the
FCDO’s personnel security team.
Robbins
was dismissed from his position by Keir Starmer on 16 April after the Guardian
revealed the FCDO gave Mandelson “developed vetting” clearance despite United
Kingdom Security Vetting (UKSV) recommending it not be granted in late January
2025. The clearance was necessary for Mandelson to take up his announced role
as British ambassador to Washington.
Collard
has claimed that it was only after Mandelson was removed from his post in
September 2025 that he saw the UKSV assessment summary. He said the summary
document featured tickboxes noting Mandelson was a “high concern” and vetting
officers recommended “clearance denied”, as well as a statement from UKSV that
he was a “very borderline case”.
Collard’s
answers to questions from MPs on the foreign affairs committee, published on
Monday evening, add a new name to the list of officials who were aware
Mandelson had not been recommended for clearance by UKSV. He said, before
speaking to Robbins, he discussed it with his line manager, the chief operating
officer in the FCDO, then Corin Robertson. Robertson is now the British
ambassador to Japan.
The
question of whether to grant Mandelson clearance, Collard said, was the only
time he had spoken with Robbins or his predecessors as permanent secretary
about a specific decision to grant vetting.
The FCDO
described the decision to go against the recommendations made by UKSV as
“unusual but not exceptional”, but this includes instances where the department
decided to block security clearance despite UKSV concluding it would be
appropriate.
While
Collard said he “felt pressure” to rapidly conclude Mandelson’s vetting
process, he said that this did not affect the “professional judgment that was
reached by himself” or members of the personnel security team he led.
But it is
this, among many remarkable claims in his account, that will probably attract
the most attention. Since Robbins gave oral testimony to the foreign affairs
committee last week, accounts have differed between the Foreign Office and
Downing Street as to whether there had been pressure on the department to get
Mandelson in post as soon as possible.
Robbins
told MPs: “Throughout January, honestly, my office and the foreign secretary’s
office were under constant pressure.” He characterised the questions from
Downing Street as being about “when” Mandelson would be in post, not “whether”
he might.
At prime
minister’s questions last Wednesday, Starmer sought to use Robbins’s testimony
to dismiss claims Downing Street had put pressure on the FCDO to get Mandelson
to Washington as soon as possible. Starmer said: “No pressure existed
whatsoever in relation to this case.”
Starmer
faces a vote on a parliamentary inquiry into whether he misled MPs. His comment
that “no pressure existed whatsoever” is among the comments that opposition MPs
claim are misleading, alongside a statement that “full due process” was
followed.
Downing
Street has said the prime minister’s comment about “pressure” referred to the
security vetting process, rather than the broader appointment of Mandelson. But
Collard’s comment that – while it did not affect his professional judgment – he
was aware of pressure to complete the vetting process rapidly will probably add
to the criticism of the prime minister’s remarks.
The prime
minister’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, and Philip Barton,
Robbins’s immediate predecessor as permanent secretary, are due to appear in
front of the foreign affairs committee on Tuesday morning.
They may
face questions over the differing accounts as to the pressure exerted on the
FCDO by Downing Street.
Barton
may be quizzed about his role in giving Mandelson access to the FCDO’s
headquarters before the security clearance process had concluded. Collard said
he was given an exemption as a member of the House of Lords and that
Mandelson’s private secretary informed people that the vetting process was
ongoing.

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário