UK Defence Secretary John Healey resigned over military spending disagreements, accusing PM Keir Starmer of risking national security. Starmer admits he must "turn things around" after poor election results, while the US expresses concern over UK defence contributions.
UK Business Secretary Peter Kyle aims to nurture the UK's first trillion-dollar company by increasing risk thresholds for public investment vehicles like the British Business Bank (BBB) and National Wealth Fund (NWF). Critics question the "aggressively ambitious" approach and potential for civil servants to act as fund managers, urging a return to disciplined investment principles.
Government documents reveal no record of security mitigations for Peter Mandelson's appointment as Washington ambassador, despite assurances to MPs. Files detail concerns over foreign associations, raising questions about vetting processes.
Conservative and Reform leaders cheered as they address crowd, while Labour’s Pat McFadden met with boos and shouts of ‘where is Starmer?’Thousands of people gathered outside Downing Street on Sunday to protest an increase in antisemitic hate crimes and violence, as senior politicians and interfaith leaders called for unity.The Standing Strong: Extinguish Antisemitism rally, backed by more than 30 Jewish groups, drew thousands of people to Whitehall, as Conservative and Liberal Democrat party leaders, alongside Labour and Reform representatives, addressed a crowd studded with Israeli and union jack flags, and ‘Where is Keir?’ placards. Continue reading...
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has refused to rule out sending rejected Afghan asylum seekers back to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, confirming she is monitoring EU-Taliban talks on a returns programme. The policy would reverse current UK practice, which prohibits returns because the UK does not recognise the Taliban government. Afghans are the most common nationality arriving by small boats, with 6,360 arrivals in the year ending June 2025, while grant rates for Afghan asylum have fallen sharply from 99% in 2023 to 38% in early 2025.
UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has refused to rule out sending rejected Afghan asylum seekers back to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, as she monitors closely talks between Kabul and EU countries about a returns programme. The policy would reverse current UK practice, which does not recognize the Taliban-led government. Afghans were the most common nationality arriving by small boats in the year ending June 2025, with 6,360 arrivals. The UN has described Afghanistan as a "graveyard for human rights" enforcing "gender apartheid".
UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has refused to rule out sending rejected Afghan asylum seekers back to Afghanistan, as she 'monitors very closely' EU-Taliban returns talks. The policy would reverse current UK practice, which bars returns because the UK does not recognise the Taliban government. Afghans were the most common nationality arriving by small boats in the year to June 2025 (6,360 arrivals), with grant rates falling sharply from 99% in 2023 to 38% in H1 2025. The UN has described Afghanistan as a 'graveyard for human rights' enforcing 'gender apartheid'.
Olly Robbins gave MPs a classic civil servant’s performance – and there are lessons from the past about how ministers should respondThe Whitehall satire Yes Minister was said to be Margaret Thatcher’s favourite TV show due to its proximity to reality, as the programme’s loquacious top civil servant, Sir Humphrey, might have put it.Yes Minister had a familiar groove: there would be a problem in response to which the mandarin would artfully deploy the most astonishing sophistry to avoid blame or get his own way. Jim Hacker, the largely clueless yet ambitious politician played by the late Paul Eddington, rarely won the day. Continue reading...
The firing of Olly Robbins by Prime Minister Keir Starmer over a vetting oversight has reignited debates about the relationship between politicians and the civil service, with historical precedents suggesting such conflicts often backfire on the political leadership.
Civil servants have lost trust in the U.K. prime minister after he fired another one of their top performers — and now some are out to get him.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has sacked senior Foreign Office civil servant Olly Robbins for failing to inform him that former US ambassador Peter Mandelson had not passed UK security vetting. The dismissal has sparked fury within Whitehall, with senior civil servants believing Robbins was sacked for doing what No 10 wanted by swiftly passing Mandelson through vetting and implementing mitigations. Former officials and unions have rallied behind Robbins, with the FDA union stating he did absolutely nothing wrong and was unjustifiably dismissed. The incident marks a new low in No 10-civil service relations following February's ousting of cabinet secretary Chris Wormald.
Fury erupts in Whitehall after Prime Minister Keir Starmer sacked senior Foreign Office civil servant Olly Robbins for failing to inform him that former US ambassador Peter Mandelson had not passed UK security vetting. Supporters of Robbins say he was sacked for doing exactly what No 10 wanted by swiftly passing Mandelson through vetting with mitigations. The dismissal has sparked warnings of a crisis in relations between ministers and civil servants, with senior officials questioning why they would take any risky action if they won't be protected by politicians.
MPs jeered as PM said it is ‘incredible’ he was not told full story and he was wrong to appoint Mandelson as US ambassadorAt his press conference Nigel Farage was asked about reports saying that Keir Starmer knew about the security concerns about Peter Mandelson that led to him failing his security vetting interview. That was a reference to the Telegraph splash, which says:Senior Whitehall sources told The Telegraph that the UKSV [UK Security Vetting] findings largely restated security risks that had already been drawn to Sir Keir’s attention.One senior source with knowledge of the process said: “The reality is that Starmer had already been warned about the major risks and he had waved them away.”Sources have told The Independent that MI6 failed to clear the Labour peer largely because of concerns over his business links to China.However, there were also worries that his past links to the disgraced financier and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein “would compromise him”.It’s impossible for the prime minister to say the warning lights weren’t flashing.And if you were prime minister and there were news reports last September that your ambassadorial choice had failed vetting, you would have thought perhaps he might have had some curiosity to try to find out whether this had really happened or not. I just find the whole thing totally incredible. Incredible. There is no way the prime minister couldn’t have known.The Labour backbenchers are not yet of a mood to get rid of their prime minister, although after 7 May they just might be. Continue reading...
Keir Starmer told MPs he did not mislead the Commons over the Peter Mandelson vetting controversy, accepting that information should have been provided to Parliament but denying he lied. The Prime Minister survived a parliamentary session where Kemi Badenoch failed to table a no confidence motion. The controversy stems from Starmer's decision to appoint Mandelson despite concerns about his business record and friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, with claims that Olly Robbins used discretion to overrule the vetting recommendation. Critics argue the appointment was made because Mandelson was seen as a suitable interlocutor for Donald Trump.
A senior UK minister has criticised the Foreign Office for withholding information from senior ministers about a UKSV recommendation to deny Peter Mandelson development and clearance. The minister described it as beggaring belief that such information was not shared, stating it should have been available to Parliament and the British people.
PM tells MPs he was wrong to appoint Peter Mandelson ambassador to US in his update to parliament Judgment day for PM over Mandelson scandalAt his press conference Nigel Farage was asked about reports saying that Keir Starmer knew about the security concerns about Peter Mandelson that led to him failing his security vetting interview. That was a reference to the Telegraph splash, which says:Senior Whitehall sources told The Telegraph that the UKSV [UK Security Vetting] findings largely restated security risks that had already been drawn to Sir Keir’s attention.One senior source with knowledge of the process said: “The reality is that Starmer had already been warned about the major risks and he had waved them away.”Sources have told The Independent that MI6 failed to clear the Labour peer largely because of concerns over his business links to China.However, there were also worries that his past links to the disgraced financier and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein “would compromise him”.It’s impossible for the prime minister to say the warning lights weren’t flashing.And if you were prime minister and there were news reports last September that your ambassadorial choice had failed vetting, you would have thought perhaps he might have had some curiosity to try to find out whether this had really happened or not. I just find the whole thing totally incredible. Incredible. There is no way the prime minister couldn’t have known.The Labour backbenchers are not yet of a mood to get rid of their prime minister, although after 7 May they just might be. Continue reading...
Downing Street has signalled that Keir Starmer accepts he inadvertently misled MPs by not telling them that Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting interview for ambassador to the US. The PM's spokesperson said parliament should have been given the information about the security vetting that led to a recommendation that Mandelson should not be approved, but Starmer did not knowingly mislead parliament. Under the ministerial code, only knowingly misleading parliament is a resignation offence.
Downing Street has signalled that Keir Starmer accepts he inadvertently misled MPs by not telling them that Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting interview for ambassador to the US. The PM's spokesperson said parliament should have been given this information, but Starmer did not knowingly mislead. Under the ministerial code, only knowingly misleading parliament is a resignation offence. Starmer will update parliament with the full facts. Meanwhile, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage claimed Starmer 'lied' and said Labour MPs may oust him after May election.
Whitehall officials are weighing up ‘unprecedented’ disclosure of documents in security clearance scandalStarmer did not gamble with national security over Mandelson, says ministerMinisters are under growing pressure to share the documents from Peter Mandelson’s vetting process with the parliamentary committee tasked with deciding if they should be made public.In February, MPs passed a binding parliamentary motion, known as a humble address, requiring the government to publish “all papers” relating to Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador to the US. Continue reading...
Keir Starmer appointed Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US in December 2024. UKSV, the Cabinet Office agency responsible for security vetting, concluded in late January 2025 that Mandelson should not receive Developed Vetting (DV) clearance required for frequent access to top-secret material. However, the Foreign Office overruled this decision and granted the clearance anyway, allowing Mandelson to take up the Washington post. A prior due diligence check by the Foreign Office's propriety and ethics team had warned of "general reputational risk" in the appointment. The reasons for UKSV's rejection have not been made public.
A blog post by Mark Kleinman reports that former civil service chief Kelly is urging the Prime Minister to support Britain through a Whitehall procurement overhaul.
Former civil service chief Sir George Kelly urges Prime Minister Keir Starmer to overhaul Whitehall procurement to prioritize British companies, supporting domestic businesses through government spending decisions.
