Keir Starmer accused of acting like a 'bystander' amid Peter Mandelson vetting row: 'Astonishing lack of curiosity!'

Jonathan Haslam has delivered a scathing assessment of how Keir Starmer handled Lord Mandelson's appointment and security vetting process.

Speaking to GB News, the former Director of Communications at 10 Downing Street said: "It's a mixture between Yes, Minister, In the Thick of It and Fred Karno's circus. This is a shocking state of affairs."

The former Downing Street insider expressed alarm that he found the Prime Minister's account of events entirely plausible, stating this "should give nobody any comfort whatsoever."

Mr Haslam pointed to what he described as a fundamental failure of leadership at the heart of Government, suggesting the situation exposed serious weaknesses in how Number 10 operates under Sir Keir's watch.

At the heart of Mr Haslam's criticism lies what he termed "an astonishing lack of curiosity" from the Prime Minister regarding the vetting process.

He noted that Starmer had raised his own concerns when the Cabinet Office conducted its ethical assessment of Lord Mandelson, yet failed to pursue them adequately.

Mr Haslam highlighted the unusual decision to dispatch Matthew Doyle, now Lord Doyle and himself facing scrutiny, to question Mandelson directly.

"We don't know yet what those questions were," he observed, adding that when Lord Mandelson received full clearance for top secret material "and even material that's beyond that, no questions were asked."

He characterised this as "a shocking amount of delegation, derogation of responsibility," demonstrating that Downing Street lacks "that strong spine" to demand proper answers.

Mr Haslam emphasised that the decision to appoint Lord Mandelson was fraught with obvious dangers from the outset.

"They've always known that it was going to be a risk appointing him, after all, Lord Mandelson's got form. He's been fired twice, and then there was the extremely well known association with Jeffrey Epstein," he said.

"So it was a high risk endeavour right from the outset."

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Given these circumstances, Mr Haslam argued that prudence should have dictated a more cautious approach before making any public announcement.

He suggested that Sir Keir and his team ought to have ensured complete certainty about the superior vetting requirements before proceeding, rather than pressing ahead despite facing opposition and questions about Lord Mandelson's suitability for the ambassadorial role.

Mr Haslam described Sir Keir as a "naive Prime Minister" who, despite being two years into the role, has failed to establish proper oversight of his own government.

"I think bystander is a great word to use, and he's got a responsibility across the piece in this regard," he stated.

The former communications chief drew an unfavourable comparison with his own experience, noting that John Major was "a very, very curious Prime Minister about what was happening in his name by his staff."

Regarding Ollie Robbins, the newly appointed ambassador to the United States who became embroiled in the vetting controversy, Mr Haslam suggested he had been "hard done by" whilst acknowledging he "should have dealt with things rather more differently."

He concluded: "It's an impossible question for someone who's been a spin doctor in Downing Street.

"But until I know more of Olly Robbins and what he said and his understanding of the law that he had to obey, I'd have to say I think he's been hard done by. But on the other hand, he should have dealt with things rather more differently."

Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter

from GB News https://ift.tt/cRK0kAi