Top Cabinet Office official Cat Little has told MPs that due process was followed in the vetting of Peter Mandelson for his role as UK ambassador to the US, disputing claims from former Foreign Office head Olly Robbins that her department suggested vetting might not be needed.
Key testimony from Cat Little
Giving evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee, Little, the permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office, said Robbins refused to hand over Mandelson's vetting summary to her department. The summary would have revealed that Robbins had granted Mandelson clearance against the advice of security officials. Instead, Little obtained the document directly from UK Security Vetting (UKSV).
Little disputed Robbins' claim that the Cabinet Office had suggested Mandelson might not need vetting at all. Citing emails she reviewed, she said it was actually the Foreign Office that raised the possibility that Mandelson, as a member of the House of Lords, might not require vetting under longstanding convention.
Due process and record-keeping
Little backed Prime Minister Keir Starmer's insistence that normal processes were followed, stating: "My view is that due process was followed." However, she acknowledged there appeared to be no formal record of Starmer approving Mandelson's appointment. When asked by committee chair Emily Thornberry to confirm this, Little replied: "I have shared with you the information that we have."
Debate over document release
Little confirmed internal debate about whether to release vetting documents to parliament. Her department has been gathering documents connected to Mandelson's appointment in response to a Commons "humble address" motion. She explained that Robbins resisted her department seeing vetting documents, leading to "lots of debate and discussion about how to treat vetting information".
Little took the "very unusual judgment" to go directly to UKSV to obtain the documents, a step she described as "a responsibility unique to me, and I take very seriously." She said she needed to see relevant documentation to advise the prime minister on compliance with the Commons motion.
Timeline of events
Little rejected claims of undue delay between her learning in late March that Mandelson had been initially blocked and informing Starmer on 14 April. She said she needed to seek advice before sharing the information, stating: "It took the time between 25 March and telling the prime minister on 14 April, and I truly believe that I acted as swiftly and effectively and appropriately as I could."
Foreign Office role
Little said emails showed a "very reasonable policy conversation" between security officials, where the Foreign Office personnel security team asked UKSV and the government security group for advice on whether Mandelson required vetting. The response was that vetting was needed, though the final decision rested with the Foreign Office.
