The release of the next batch of files linked to Peter Mandelson’s appointment as Britain’s ambassador to Washington has been delayed amid accusations that Labour is withholding key information from MPs.
Ministers were hauled before the Commons on Tuesday after claims that the Government had “withheld and redacted key information” from documents due to be scrutinised by Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle granted an urgent question on the matter following mounting concern over the handling of the so-called Mandelson files, which ministers were ordered to release earlier this year after Conservatives successfully used a Humble Address motion to force publication.
Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and a senior ally of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, admitted the second batch of documents — which could have been released this week — would now not appear until June.
The delay immediately triggered accusations of a “cover-up” from opposition MPs.
Sir Jeremy Wright, deputy chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, warned the Government had applied redactions for reasons beyond those agreed by Parliament and claimed some material had been withheld entirely.
He said MPs had been clear that only information that risked damaging national security or international relations should be removed before publication.
Shadow minister Neil O’Brien said the claims represented “an extremely serious matter” which undermined the will of the Commons.
“So, for the Government to apply redactions beyond the scope agreed by the House, and also withhold documents entirely from the ISC, completely undermines what this House agreed,” he said.
The controversy deepened after Emily Thornberry, chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, complained that “obstacles” had hampered attempts by MPs to “get to the truth”.
Last week, the Intelligence and Security Committee publicly criticised the Government for redacting information “far too broadly”, intensifying pressure on Downing Street over transparency surrounding Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
The committee has demanded assurances that the redactions comply with both the spirit and intent of the Humble Address motion passed earlier this year.
Mr Jones defended the Government’s approach, insisting ministers had followed standard procedure and arguing that publishing the names and contact details of junior officials would not be in the public interest.
He told MPs the second batch of files would be accompanied by a methodology document explaining how decisions on redactions had been made.
“The targeted redactions made to the material, beyond those made relevant to national security or international relations, have been made in line with clear precedent set by previous administrations,” he said.
The row threatens to deepen political tensions around Labour’s handling of transparency and accountability, with opponents increasingly accusing the Government of resisting parliamentary scrutiny over sensitive appointments and internal decision-making.
Leave a Comment