As credible an explanation as a vacuum cleaner related injury – politicalbetting.com
As credible an explanation as a vacuum cleaner related injury – politicalbetting.com
A government spokesperson confirms that the report is correct, but said neither the prime minister nor any government minister was aware until this week."The security vetting process for Peter Mandelson was sponsored by the FCDO. The decision to grant Developed Vetting to Peter…
2
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What isn't surprising is that it was obvious based on his past problems that Mandelson would have hidden issues...
That sounds like a woman on serious maneuvers. Also she could bring it off. The no nonsense working class woman with basic common sense and patriotism, unlike the odious creep Starmer. She would junk shit like Chagos, and all the human rights lawyer crap, and she would unite the party. If she appointed Streeting Chancellor that would add to her lustre
Labour should go for it. Rayner as PM, Streeting in Number 11. Do it now, the nettle is better seized ASAP
C'mon Forest!!
A surer investment than UK Treasury gilts.
"No, no. No need for that."
"What if he fails security vetting?"
"I trust you'll do the right thing. Don't bother me."
... It's just not plausible. And moreover, I think the incompetence of not checking whether Mandelson passed security vetting is in itself arguably a resigning offence.
Before that, it’s another stretch of clowning back to……. Fuck knows. Blair? Sierra Leone?
We have been governed by fools for two solid decades, and the results are all around us
His message:
"Hi all, I just wanted to share the following for anyone who does not know the facts of what has happened:
“The security vetting process for Peter Mandelson was sponsored by the FCDO. The decision to grant Developed Vetting to Peter Mandelson against the recommendation of UK Security Vetting was taken by officials in the FCDO.
“Neither the Prime Minister, nor any Government Minister, was aware that Peter Mandelson was granted Developed Vetting against the advice of UK Security Vetting until earlier this week.
“Once the Prime Minister was informed he immediately instructed officials to establish the facts about why the Developed Vetting was granted, in order to enact plans to update the House of Commons.
“The Government is committed to complying with the Humble Address in full as soon as possible. Any documentation within the scope of the Humble Address that requires redaction on the basis of national security or international relations will be provided to the ISC. This will include documents provided to the FCDO by UK Security Vetting.”
For further background in case helpful:
The security vetting information from UK Security Vetting was obtained by officials undertaking the process in order to comply fully with the Humble Address. Once they received this information, the officials that obtained the information, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Secretary agreed that there should be an exercise to establish the facts and that the information should be made public.
The FCDO is a “make recommendation customer” for UK Security Vetting. This means that the FCDO is the ultimate decision making authority on Developed Vetting cases, based on a non-binding recommendation from UK Security Vetting."
Two Boris bigguns
“Once the Prime Minister was informed he immediately instructed officials to establish the facts about why the Developed Vetting was granted, in order to enact plans to update the House of Commons.”
IN ORDER TO ENACT PLANS TO UPDATE
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Heh.
One of many problems for Starmer is that too many echoes of partygate.
A PM who told the Commons, during PMQs, that something didn’t happen.
Then we find out it did happen, but the PM says he didn’t know.
Under those circumstances, Starmer called for Boris Johnson to resign.
https://x.com/paulbranditv/status/2044842456751972551?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
See the Post Office Enquiry and all the other long list of fuckups.
The Top People never know anything. Apart from their personal bank account and sort code. So they can bank the large salaries they need to sustain their lack of knowledge.
There is no magic door. There are no ninjas.
So you create a centralised vetting agency with the bland name of "UK Security Vetting", but vetting decisions in the FCDO are actually made by the FCDO and they're free to ignore what it says. Maybe what happened with Mandelson wasn't an exception but the standard process for the Foreign Office?
Knowing the right people has always been important, and although our culture attempts to make admitting that more shameful, it never seems to actually stop it from driving things.
Plans to change HS2 train size could reduce capacity and speed in north, says expert
Review of original train order is meant to prevent service problems north of Birmingham but it may do the opposite
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/apr/13/plans-to-change-hs2-train-size-could-reduce-capacity-and-speed-in-north-says-expert
Obviously not a universal element.
You'll have people suggesting everything should be taken out of their hands next (oh wait, people do already).
Tell them to sod off
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tuE67Zc7fc
And we told them to sod off a couple of years ago.
As the FCDO knew all this all along it is also not entirely credible that once the solids hit the fan months ago they didn't think the vetting fail interesting enough to mention to Downing Street over some months, indeed until about Tuesday. I don't think it will have slipped their mind.
So far I don't find the account fully capable of being believed. But I suppose we must remain open to persuasion.
Even if it was just 'in the national interest'.
For this reason OO trains are NOT scale models, they are merely toys!
HO is proper 1:87 scale.
“A takeaway turned up”
One day the truth will come out about that I’m sure
The foreign secretary Yvette Cooper and the permanent undersecretary at the Foreign Office Olly Robbins have just said that any failure to recognise that Mandelson’s friendship with the convicted paedophile Epstein made him unsuitable to be US ambassador rested solely with the Cabinet Office, Downing Street and Starmer, not with the foreign office. See attached extract from their letter to Emily Thornberry #Mandelson
https://x.com/peston/status/1967915926340485201?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
(Actually, I'm a Jalfrezi man)
And just how bad could the post be?
Did I just hear this right from Labour’s Emily Thornberry?
She was asked “Do you think this could sink the Prime Minister?” in regard to Starmer misleading the Public and the House that Mandelson had passed the Security Vetting when he hadn’t.
Her answer? “No because he was reading from a script” and “He’s only a human being”
What the hell did I just listen to??
All our best spies went to Cambridge, Moscow's best spies too...
@Sunil_Prasannan
There was no vetting process as long as you went to the right school and University. It only came in after the Philby scandal.
During my meeting with Chancellor of the Exchequer @RachelReevesMP, I emphasized the @USTreasury’s commitment to Economic Fury, leveraging all tools and authorities against those who continue to support Iran’s terrorist activities.
and
OUST STARMER
The perfect clean skin.
To distract from the Epstein scandal, Trump attempted to recreate Persia from Iran.
Meanwhile, to distract from the Epstein scandal, Starmer admitted to receipts for a Peshawari Naan.
An English team in the Europa league final.
You came and you failed at your vetting
But were appointed anyway
Oh Mandy.
I confess I'm finding all the "explanations" giving credibility a decent turn on the rack but as yet I've yet to see that one detail which points directly to Starmer deliberately misleading Parliament as distinct from accidentally misleading by being given incorrect information.
Nonetheless, it looks bad and clearly the vetting process revealed issues wirh Mandelson which were then overruled which looked risky then and now look disastrous.
As is so often the case with these matters, it's back to who knew what and when.