Starmer sacks Olly Robbins over Mandelson vetting row, allies say
Starmer sacks Olly Robbins over Mandelson vetting row, allies say
Sacking followed claims of misled MPs as the Mandelson vetting controversy deepens, with allies disputing the PM's account and opposition pressuring for a probe.
Sir Keir Starmer dismissed Olly Robbins last week for failing to tell him that Lord Mandelson had failed vetting for the role of ambassador to the US. The move came as questions swirled over what the prime minister knew and when, and whether MPs were misled during a period of intense scrutiny over the vetting saga. The decision marks a dramatic turn in the Mandelson vetting episode and raises questions about the handling of sensitive appointments at the top of government.
Robbins’ allies insist no one asked him for an explanation. They say the prime minister informed MPs of a question being raised about why the vetting conclusions were not shared, but that no direct request for an explanation was made to Robbins. They describe a timeline in which Robbins only learned of the PM’s dismay after the conversation, while the prime minister had reportedly been told the night before. When questioned by a committee, Robbins suggested a potential legal claim could follow. No statement from No 10 has altered that depiction in the view of his supporters.
The row has spilled into Parliament, with opposition parties reportedly seeking the speaker’s intervention to refer Starmer to the privileges committee over alleged misleading of MPs. Starmer has repeatedly denied dishonesty. While some senior colleagues in his party call for calm and clarity, others have signalled that the controversy could linger as the government navigates questions about reliability and governance in Westminster. The unfolding dispute comes amid continued scrutiny of vetting processes and the handling of sensitive foreign policy appointments, keeping London’s political scene firmly in the spotlight.
Supporters and critics alike watch closely for any follow-up statements or a potential reinstatement discussion, as lawmakers weigh accountability, timing, and the implications for leadership in the governing party.
