No.10 speaks out following Sir Olly Robbins giving evidence to MPs

Sir Keir Starmer has informed his Cabinet that Sir Olly Robbins made an “error of judgment” by failing to ensure he was adequately briefed on concerns raised during the vetting process for Lord Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador.

This statement comes as Downing Street rejects claims of internal pressure and procedural failures over the appointment.

Tensions are mounting over how the appointment was handled, following evidence presented to MPs by Sir Olly Robbins.

During his appearance before the Foreign Affairs Committee, Sir Olly directly criticised the decision-making process, suggesting that Sir Keir should have reconsidered Lord Mandelson’s appointment after due diligence reportedly highlighted serious reputational concerns.

He stated, “I regret that the due diligence process, which revealed significant reputational risks, didn’t influence the Prime Minister’s judgment.” The vetting process reportedly identified issues, including Lord Mandelson’s connections with Jeffrey Epstein and certain aspects of his business dealings with China.

Sir Olly also mentioned to the committee that there had been a lack of interest in assessing the appointment critically; rather, the focus was on how quickly it could be finalised. He alleged that there was pressure within the government to expedite the ambassador’s deployment to Washington as quickly as “humanly possible.”

However, Downing Street firmly denied any allegations of improper conduct or political interference in the process. It dismissed claims that Foreign Office officials had been “nagged, cajoled, or bullied” by the Prime Minister’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, and rejected any notion that an “atmosphere of pressure” surrounded the appointment.

The dispute now revolves around conflicting accounts from former senior officials and No 10 over how the vetting process was conducted and whether the concerns raised during due diligence were appropriately escalated before the appointment was confirmed.

While the government asserts that proper procedures were followed, Sir Olly’s testimony has heightened scrutiny of the timeline and decision-making involved in one of the government’s most sensitive diplomatic postings.