Keir Starmer has claimed his opponents have been weaponising the Peter Mandelson scandal as he pushed back against reports the cabinet is divided as pressure mounts on the Prime Minister
Keir Starmer has accused his political opponents of using the Peter Mandelson scandal to try and derail the Government – claiming the cabinet is united.
The Prime Minister shot back shortly after a top civil servant claimed sacked Foreign Office chief Sir Olly Robbins had refused to hand over a vetting summary about the disgraced peer. Asked if he had considered resigning, Mr Starmer told broadcasters: “I think it’s very important to see what’s going on here.
“Last week, my political opponents were saying that there’s no way a civil servant wouldn’t have told me about the outcome of a developed vetting security exercise. Turns out my political opponents were completely wrong about that.
“Then they said that I was dishonest. It turns out they were completely wrong about that. They are now putting any allegation they can and I will tell you for why – they are opposed politically to what this Government is trying to achieve.”
He pointed to employment rights laws, investment in the NHS and tough rules for landlords, stating: “But my political opponents don’t like that and so you have these allegations that keep on coming.”
READ MORE: Morgan McSweeney summoned to bombshell Commons hearing on Mandelson scandalREAD MORE: Keir Starmer vents fury at Foreign Office over Mandelson vetting scandal – ‘beggars belief’
Pressed on reports his Cabinet is unhappy, the PM said: “The Cabinet is working really hard on a huge amount of issues and what we’re delivering at the moment.
“We’re preparing for the King’s Speech and all the further measures that we’re going to need to take the country forward.”
His remarks come after a top Cabinet Office official insisted she took the “very unusual judgement” of requesting Mandelson’s vetting information directly from security officials – after ex-Foreign Office chief Sir Olly refused.
Cat Little – the most senior civil servant at the Cabinet Office – told MPs today she could not give a reason for the sacked official not handing over the details. She said: “I can only talk about my judgments and decisions.”
Her testimony comes as the fallout from the Mandelson vetting scandal continues to overshadow the work of Government. One minister was even forced to insist on Thursday morning claims of a split in the Cabinet over the issue was a “load of guff”.
Home Office minister Alex Norris attempted to play down reports of tensions in the most senior ranks of government, saying: “If I had a pound, certainly under the previous government, for the number of times I saw Cabinet stories in the papers, my St George’s pints would probably be more multiple than there will be in reality.”
He added: “We’re getting on with the job, that’s what we’re doing and we’re united.”
Giving evidence today, Ms Little said she had begun to uncover documents related to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as part of the humble address process which began in February and is aimed at providing detailed information to MPs about the process which led to the peer becoming the US ambassador.
The senior civil servant told the committee she had “multiple discussions” with then-Foreign Office chief Sir Olly as part of trying to gather information, before adding: “In the middle of March, I have a meeting with Sir Olly and a senior member of his team, and this is after the point that I’ve been told that this summary document exists.
“I specifically ask to see this document and any decision-making audit trail around those judgments at the time. It was made clear to me that that information would not be forthcoming.”
Asked by committee chairwoman Dame Emily Thornberry who was not forthcoming, Ms Little replied: “Sir Olly.” This was in the context of “a lot of back and forth discussion about the status of how we would treat vetting information”, Ms Little added.
Ms Little also defended a three-week delay in providing the vital information to Mr Starmer (on April 14) after she finally recieved a summary of the advice on 25 March, 2026. The senior official told MPs she believed she was duty-bound to first seek legal advice due to the unusual nature of the highly classified information.