Starmer leaves key questions about Mandelson unanswered

This article appeared as part of the Daily Sensemaker newsletter – one story a day to make sense of the world. To receive it in your inbox, featuring content exclusive to the newsletter, sign up for free here.

Keir Starmer has insisted that he did not mislead the House of Commons over Peter Mandelson’s failed security vetting. The prime minister told MPs that civil servants had taken a "deliberate decision” to withhold this information, something he described as “frankly staggering”. He added he would have blocked the appointment had he known. It was a high-stakes moment for the prime minister that leaves several key questions unanswered. For example: why did Number 10 fail to enquire about the outcome of the checks, given the Cabinet Office had already flagged risks from Mandelson’s past? A possible answer was provided by the chair of foreign affairs committee, Emily Thornberry, who claimed that appointing Mandelson was a political priority that overrode security concerns. More light should be shed when Olly Robbins, the senior civil servant who has taken the blame, appears before MPs later today.

Read more: Commons debate does little to rid Starmer of Mandelson woes