Sir Keir Starmer must take responsibility for the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal, Rishi Sunak has warned, arguing his appointment as US ambassador was a “grave lapse of political judgment”.
Writing in The Times, the former prime minister said the government is “at risk of learning the wrong lessons from this sorry episode”, arguing that it was “not a failure of process but of political judgment”.
In his first intervention on the issue, the MP for Richmond said: “I fear, though, that we are at risk of learning the wrong lessons from this sorry episode. A view is taking shape that we need yet more process. Already, we have a review by a retired judge into security vetting.
“The temptation for Downing Street will be to announce a new set of processes and claim that these mean this mistake could not happen again. The government will hope it will be a chance to move on from this scandal. But this approach misses the point — and would actually make things worse.
“The Mandelson appointment was not a failure of process but of political judgment. The responsibility for the decision rests with the prime minister. If the response to this crisis is more process, it will just mean the system is even more geared against ministers being able to actually change things, when what we need is better judgment and sounder decisions.”
Mr Sunak said that the “right response to bad decisions is better decision-makers, not process paralysis”, arguing: “Add in too many checks and balances and the system becomes unbalanced. That is where we currently find ourselves. For the sake of our democracy, we must not respond to this grave lapse of political judgment by making that worse.”
Earlier this month, Sir Keir Starmer said he had appointed Sir Adrian Fulford, a senior judge and chairman of the Southport Inquiry, to lead a review into how security vetting decisions are made.
It came after he said he was “frankly staggered” that he was not told that UK Security Vetting (UKSV) had recommended that Lord Mandelson not be given developed vetting clearance for the US ambassador post, saying Sir Adrian’s probe will examine “the means by which all decisions are made in relation to national security vetting”.
The prime minister has repeatedly told MPs that he and his ministers only found out that UKSV had advised Lord Mandelson should be denied clearance for the role last Tuesday evening, despite The Independent raising concerns that he had failed vetting last September and running a front page story on it – prompting claims of a cover-up.
Sir Keir is now facing mounting political pressure over the scandal, with his premiership hanging in the balance.
On Friday, The Independent revealed that the PM could face a Commons vote as early as next week that could spark an inquiry into his handling of the vetting saga.
Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle looks set to give MPs a say on whether the prime minister is referred to the powerful Commons Privileges Committee for a probe into whether he misled parliament over the disgraced peer’s appointment.
It comes after MPs from both sides of the House, including Labour, are understood to have written to the speaker requesting that the committee, which deals with serious disciplinary issues in parliament, investigate the PM.
Sir Lindsay is widely expected to make a statement on the letters on Monday, meaning Sir Keir could face a vote in the Commons on Tuesday – the same day his former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, will be grilled by MPs on his role in Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
