Emily Thornberry

I really do not know. The Foreign Office got the UKSV clearance on 29 January 2025, and it says that it did something about it, but we cannot see what that is. An email on page 72 of part I is the nearest thing to mitigations I have been able to find, and Ian Collard referred to it in his evidence. It is an email he wrote on 30 January, and I think it is the mitigations, but I just do not think it is a robust set of mitigations to deal with serious security concerns. The email states: “As part of the usual clearance policy process, UKSV identified some areas in his application for ESND to review”— that is the security man. “I understand that Lord Mandelson’s private sector engagements are being managed by HRD”— that is human resources— “and the Legal Directorate through the conflict of interest process.” Who knows? It continues: “With regard to personal conduct”— I think that is hanging out with oligarchs, being friends with the Finance Minister, borrowing money and who knows what else— “I understand that Lord Mandelson has received a letter from Mervyn Thomas, informing him of his responsibilities as an FCDO employee, including under the Diplomatic Service Regulations.” Is that it? He got a letter from a man telling him to behave himself! We have not seen the letter, and I do not know what it is. The email continues: “Matters pertaining to his overseas contacts will certainly be reviewed by the STRAP authorities.” STRAP is another issue, and we should not be distracted by STRAP. Mandelson needed to follow the developed vetting before getting anywhere near the latest STRAP stuff. It is important that we take these things in order. We have that email, which is about as pathetic as it can be. There might be something in the nine-page summary that some Members sitting in this Chamber have seen. It might be that that summary showing the security concerns has a page or so at the end—it is a blank page—asking the Foreign Office for its response. UKSV is giving a recommendation saying, “Mandelson should not be given the job, he is a security risk.” The process might be that the Foreign Office has to write something on that form saying, “We have read this. We don’t agree with you. We think he should be appointed, and we’re going to put in the following mitigations”, and then list them. It might be that the Foreign Office did not fill that in properly, and it might be that that bit of the form remains blank. I do not know whether anybody is in a position to be able to enlighten me one way or the other, or whether we will have to wait for the police to give us the document.