No way Lammy wasn’t told Mandelson failed vetting, says former foreign secretary
Exclusive: In an interview with The Independent, former foreign secretary James Cleverly sets out the reasons why ministers must have known Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting
It is “inconceivable” that Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy were not told about Peter Mandelson failing the security vetting process for the role of US ambassador, a former foreign secretary has claimed, amid growing accusations that the prime minister scapegoated the head of the Foreign Office in order to save himself.
Describing his own recent experience, Sir James Cleverly, who was foreign secretary from 2022 to 2023, said: “I cannot envisage a universe where someone senior in the Foreign Office wouldn’t have sat down with the foreign secretary and said something to warn about this.”
Queen Anne is dead too apparently.
4 comments:
But, but, there are probably many legally trained politicians who may carefully interpret the question so that they may proffer a carefully worded answer.
So, as an example, "the case didn't cross my desk" may be perfectly true but the case may well have been extensively debated in a committee room.
Or perhaps "I didn't know until Tuesday" may be perfectly true for a very specific case of "knowing".
Rhetoric again I am sorry to say. Perhaps we need politicians to ask very carefully worded questions that are less open to 'interpretation'?
Terminological inexactitudes, AKH.
DJ - yes, Starmer seems to do that all the time such that much of what he says can be valid in a strict legalistic sense but not in the sense people hear and he must know that. Doesn't work politically though, although he still appears to think it will do. Curiously obtuse of him.
James - that's it and they think people don't notice.
A propos of Lammy did any news outlet follow up the story of the ‘rolled up painting’ (allegedly accompanied by a large sum in cash) found in the boot of the disputed taxi and returned to Lammy and his wife by the police?
It seems odd that the couple, with multiple forms of transport at their disposal, chose a seven-hour incognito taxi ride to reach their holiday destination from their official engagements in Italy. It may, of course, be entirely coincidental that Italy has strict legislation surrounding the export of antique art and that, while airports operate thorough security checks, cars crossing Schengen zone land borders are generally waved through without stopping (in our repeated experience between France and Italy, the officials are in the booth about half the time and, even when they are, they barely deign to glance up from their coffee, baguettes or panini as you pass).
If it turns out there was something fishy about the situation and it got out in certain circles, could it be giving someone leverage over him in matters such as, say, the appointment of an ambassador?
Post a Comment