00:03Thank you, Mr Speaker. With permission, before I go into the details, I want to be very clear
00:08with this House that while this statement will focus on the process surrounding Peter
00:15Mandelson's vetting and appointment, at the heart of this there is also a judgment I made
00:21that was wrong. I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson. I take responsibility for
00:27that decision, and I apologise again to the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein,
00:32who were clearly failed by my decision.
00:37Mr Speaker, last Tuesday evening, the 14th of April, I found out for the first time that
00:45on the 29th of January 2025, before Peter Mandelson took up his position as ambassador, the Foreign
00:54Office officials granted him developed vetting clearance against the specific recommendation
01:02of the United Kingdom security vetting that developed vetting clearance should be denied.
01:10Not only that, the Foreign Office officials who made that decision did not pass this information
01:18to me, to the Foreign Secretary, to her predecessor, the Deputy Prime Minister, to any other minister,
01:28or even to the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald.
01:36I made the decision to appoint him on the 18th of December. The appoint was announced on the 20th,
01:4219th, and the security vetting process began on the 23rd of December 2024. Mr Speaker, I want
01:51to make clear to the House that for a direct ministerial appointment, it was usual for security
01:59vetting to happen after the appointment, but before starting in post. Then on the 28th of January
02:082025, UK SV recommended to the Foreign Office that developed vetting clearance should be denied
02:16to Peter Mandelson. The following day, on the 29th of January 2025, notwithstanding the UK SV
02:26recommendation that developed vetting clearance should be denied, Foreign Office officials made
02:33the decision to grant developed vetting clearance for Peter Mandelson.
02:38I accept that the sensitive personal information provided by an individual being vetted must be
02:46protected from disclosure. If that were not the case, the integrity of the whole process would
02:54be compromised. What I do not accept is that the appointing minister cannot be told of the
03:02recommendation by UK SV. So let me be very clear. The recommendation in the Peter Mandelson case could
03:12and should have been shared with me before he took up his post. Mr Speaker, let me make a second
03:22point.
03:23If I had known before he took up his post that UK SV recommendation was that developed vetting clearance should
03:31be denied,
03:32I would not have gone ahead with the appointment.
03:36Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker, let me now move to September 2025.
03:41So let me move to September 2025.
03:42...
Comments