Keir Starmer MP: speeches

2896 published records · newest first.

Speeches

20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I have set out the procedure in some detail. Information should have been provided to me. It was not provided to me. If it had been provided, I would not have allowed the appointment of Peter Mandelson to proceed in the way that it did.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I acted on the information that was provided to me in the due diligence process. The information that was dealt with in the security vetting process was not made available to me—nor can that detail be made available to me. It is the recommendation that should have been made available to me.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
It was insufficient because all it told me was that the recommendation of UKSV was to deny the clearance. What it did not tell me was who then provided the clearance, why they did it and who knew about it. They were questions that the House would obviously want to raise with me, which is why I urgently asked for those facts to be established: so that I could come to the House and provide the full account that I have provided to the House.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
The process was that UKSV informs the FCDO of its findings and its recommendation, and then there is an escalation process, which is part of the process in the sense that it is for the FCDO, in these particular cases, to make the final decision, which is what it did in this case.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
The first I knew that there had been a recommendation to deny clearance was Tuesday evening of last week. The security clearance had been given by the Foreign Office before Peter Mandelson took up the post. As soon as it came to my attention, I sought the information that I have put before the House today.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
Peter Mandelson was asked various questions on the back of the due diligence exercise and he did not tell the truth in his answers. The decision to appoint him was an error: it was my error, and I have apologised for it.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
That is why last week the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister suspended the power of the FCDO to make a recommendation or to take a decision contrary to the recommendation of UKSV.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
A number of inquiries were made, questions were asked of the FCDO, and the answer they gave was the same. They did not disclose to me or anyone in No. 10 that UKSV had advised and recommended against clearance.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
That is precisely why I have asked for the entire developed vetting process to be reviewed by Sir Adrian Fulford, and I have made it absolutely clear to this House and to the civil service that my strong view is that the information that was not provided to me could have been provided and should have been provided.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
There were two different processes. One was the due diligence process carried out by the Cabinet Office, in which Peter Mandelson was asked questions. Separately, there was the developed vetting process in which the recommendation of UKSV was not shared with me until Tuesday evening.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I thank my right hon. Friend for her question. Her Committee did ask relevant questions, and that is why I have indicated that it was unforgivable that the Foreign Secretary was asked to sign a statement in response to those very questions without being told about the recommendation. The questions were asked; the Foreign Secretary was advised and asked to sign a statement without being told the relevant information. That is unforgivable. As for the appointment before developed vetting, I have changed that process now, so that it can never happen again; my right hon. Friend the Committee Chair heard me quote the evidence of the former Cabinet Secretary and the former permanent secretary in relation to that. Let me deal with my right hon. Friend’s third point, which is that somehow Downing Street’s wish to appoint Peter Mandelson overrode security concerns— [ Interruption. ] No, Mr Speaker, let me be very clear: if I had been told that Peter Mandelson, or anybody else, had failed or not been given clearance on security vetting, I would not have appointed them. A deliberate decision was taken to withhold that material from me. This was not a lack of asking; this was not an oversight— [ Interruption. ] It was a decision taken not to share that information on repeated occasions.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
Let me answer that in relation to Sir Olly, and let me start by saying he has had a distinguished career. I must say that, and I do say that. Still, notwithstanding that, he should have provided this information to me, and he could have provided it to me. He is giving evidence tomorrow, but I can say to the House that, when I spoke to him on Thursday, his view to me was that he could not provide this information to me because he was not allowed to provide the information to me. [ Interruption. ] Well, I do not want to put words in his mouth, because it is very important he gives his own evidence. In relation to the question that is being asked of me, when I said, “Why wasn’t this shared with me?” he did— [ Interruption. ] I have been asked what questions I put to him. I have been asked for the answer, and I am trying to give that answer. I am trying to give it without putting words into Olly Robbins’s mouth, because I do not think that it is fair of me to do so. What he said to me was essentially that he took the view that this process did not allow him to disclose to me the recommendation of UKSV. No doubt he will be asked further questions about that; that is the reason that he gave to me.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
All the appropriate and necessary developed vetting has taken place in No. 10. Everybody has passed that. [ Interruption. ] They have all passed it.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I have accepted that that was my decision and I have apologised for it.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
Peter Mandelson got DV clearance before he took up his post as ambassador. That clearance was given by the Foreign Office. I found out that that was against the recommendation on Tuesday evening of last week.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
He was given clearance—those are the facts as I have set them out.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I will ensure that the review covers all relevant issues and material, and I will take into account what the right hon. Gentleman has just said.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I understood it to be subject to developed vetting, but it was because of the process that, in September 2025, I asked Chris Wormald to do a review for me of the process, and he did that by reference back to the Simon Case letter.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I have made it clear that my position was that the appointment was subject to developed vetting. I cannot in all conscience remember what exactly has been redacted. [ Interruption. ] The hon. Member is asking me about what was in a redacted note. I understood that the process had been subject to developed vetting. That is why I asked Chris Wormald to look at the process and reference back to Simon Case.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
Because I wanted to know who took the decision, the basis upon which they took it, and who knew about the decision, so that I could set out a full account to the House, which is what I have done this afternoon.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I have set out to the House the facts of what happened in this particular case. I am staggered and I find it unbelievable that I was not given the information I should have been given.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I am addressing the question about the process in relation to Peter Mandelson. I have set that out in some detail to the House and answered a number of questions.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
I have read that evidence, and it remains my strong view that the recommendation of UKSV could and should have been shared with me, and could and should have been shared with the Foreign Secretary and thus with the Select Committee—and it should have been.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
Peter Mandelson was given developed vetting clearance. That was the clear position.
20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source
More
We have taken a number of measures in relation to crypto—

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →