Ian

@Steven_Swinford Surely he's entitled to disregard "advice"? Otherwise, what's the point of it? The process is that the ambassador must be vetted before being confirmed and that was followed. It's a shit-show but it wasn't outwith the process.

Opposition parties are urging the Speaker of the Commons to refer Sir Keir Starmer to an official parliamentary sleaze inquiry amid claims he misled MPs over the Lord Mandelson scandal The prime minister is facing mounting criticism from cabinet ministers and MPs over his handling of the crisis before critical elections across the country in two weeks’ time The Times understands that, in an attempt to ratchet up the pressure on Starmer, Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, is pressing for his referral to the privileges committee, the body that ended Boris Johnson’s career in British politics after it found he had lied in the Commons over the lockdown parties scandal She believes there is evidence that the prime minister misled the Commons when he said that “due process” had been followed in the appointment of Mandelson as ambassador to the United States in 2024. In fact, Simon Case, the cabinet secretary at the time and now Lord Case, told Starmer to complete security vetting before announcing his appointment — advice that the prime minister chose not to take She is also highlighting Starmer’s claim at prime minister’s questions that “no pressure existed whatsoever in this case”. Sir Olly Robbins, who Starmer sacked as the Foreign Office’s permanent secretary last week, said that “constant pressure” was applied Badenoch is being backed by the leaders of the Liberal Democrats and the SNP, who are also privately urging Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, to act. A Conservative spokesman said that “all options were on the table” to hold Starmer to account in parliament thetimes.com/article/71526f…

@RWillmore86339 @alexwickham Because uksv is independent of the PM and reports to cabinet office. Because vetting very rarely is a hard no and it doesn't seem to have been in this case either Because if anyone should have told the PM, it should've been Robbins who took the decision (as per process).

@alexwickham Why didn't uksv tell the prime minister it was a hard no

The key point of process that determines if you believe Keir Starmer or Olly Robbins is right is still unclear this morning. The Cabinet Office - led by Antonia Romeo and Cat Little - say they discovered a UKSV document that clearly recommends against giving Mandelson clearance, with a tick in a red box for ‘clearance denied’. Bloomberg reported on Friday how Cabinet Office officials found this bombshell document on a secure portal while complying with the humble address and everything then developed from there. That document is the basis for Starmer’s claim that Mandelson failed his vetting and that he should have been told about this recommendation by Robbins. On the face of it, it does seem absolutely extraordinary that officials would keep this apparently clear written recommendation on such a high-profile appointment from the PM and cabinet secretary. That is why Robbins was sacked. But Robbins testified yesterday that he never saw this document. Instead he said he only had a verbal briefing with the Foreign Office security team that, in his words, only ‘leaned’ against recommending clearance be granted. He says they were then able to mitigate the concerns and approve Mandelson’s clearance. The Cabinet Office version of events and the document they’ve found, and Robbins’ version, appear to be inconsistent. Robbins’ contention is essentially that this is all a huge misunderstanding, that Mandelson did not fail his vetting, that the problems raised by UKSV were resolvable by him and he resolved them, and that he shouldn’t have been sacked. Robbins says any pressure from No10 did not impact the decision-making of him and his officials. Sources say the missing person in the story is Dr Ian Collard, a former senior FCDO security official. He is the person who had the verbal briefing with Robbins where they agreed they could mitigate the UKSV concerns, they say. Collard has since left the government. It seems Collard might be able to clear up whether UKSV did firmly recommend against Mandelson or only lean that way, and therefore whether Robbins was right to try to fix the problem himself with mitigations, or if he should have rejected Mandelson’s DV on the advice of UKSV and told No10 what had happened. If the UKSV concerns weren’t that grave and were possible to mitigate, Robbins has a good argument that he was right to do that and clear Mandelson’s DV without raising it up the chain, and therefore that he was unfairly sacked for trying to do what the PM wanted. If the UKSV concerns were more clear cut, as the UKSV document produced by the Cabinet Office implies, it’s harder for Robbins to argue he did the right thing. You’d have thought Collard and senior Cabinet Office officials will be called by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee to try to clear this up in the coming days…

@adventuresofac5 @campbellclaret @jk_rowling @RestIsPolitics @SarahEMcBride So she's declined. Then get someone else.

@ian_c99 @campbellclaret @jk_rowling @RestIsPolitics @SarahEMcBride hi they've tried several times to get JK Rowling. And....?

For those in the middle of the @jk_rowling conversation I strongly recommend you listen to @RestIsPolitics LEADING interview with @SarahEMcBride - you could not wish to hear a more compelling, passionate and measured advocate of trans rights and human rights. m.youtube.com/watch?v=UvxQze…

@campbellclaret @jk_rowling @RestIsPolitics @SarahEMcBride Why won't you interview @ForWomenScot ?

@journoangst @campbellclaret @RoryStewartUK @RestIsPolitics This is spot on.

@campbellclaret @RoryStewartUK @RestIsPolitics Yes, the vetting process worked. It found Mandelson posed risks, so measures were put in place to manage these, as is allowed. Sir Olly Robbins did his job so there was nothing to tell anyone. But he’s been sacked anyway by a PM who made a bad error and thinks an apology’s fine.

Only watched the opening of Olly Robbins’ evidence because @RoryStewartUK and I were recording this week’s @RestIsPolitics and trying to follow simultaneously (multitasking!!) From what I saw and hear from people whose judgement I trust it is clear he is a big loss to the civil service. As for Rory’s views on the PM … not for the faint-hearted…

@truthbetold1x @campbellclaret @RoryStewartUK @RestIsPolitics the process specifically allows for this judgement to be made and risk mitigations to be established. It's all hugely normal. Which is why he didn't tell starmer. After all, Mandy had passed clearance (albeit with some concerns). The sacking is just political.

@campbellclaret @RoryStewartUK @RestIsPolitics Nope Robbins admitted approving Mandelson’s appointment despite security red flags. That was wrong. Robbins admitted deciding not to tell the PM about these red flags. That was wrong. Robbins said pressure from Number 10 had no impact on his decisions.

@maitlis it's the sacking of Robbins to protect No.10 which is the most disappointing thing. Robbins is a class act and, sadly, No.10 is not. Time for change.

The problem for No10 didnt really start with the Guardian story last Thursday - if the PM had understood that UKSV is the service provider and the ultimate decision lies with FCDO who are obligated to keep ministers out of the process, then the weirdness, the mistake came with the faux outrage and his sacking of Robbins. That’s actually when the current mess began.

@bunny_lingus @antoguerrera @BorisJohnson @repubblica nope, we absolutely do not need him back.

@antoguerrera @BorisJohnson @repubblica God we miss -and badly need right now - Johnson's grasp of complex geopolitics and soft interpersonal skills. What Labour and the Tory One Nation cult did to him - and by extension to us - was downright wicked and treacherous.

NEW. I have interviewed @BorisJohnson on Iran, Ukraine, Trump, NATO, Brexit for @repubblica. Some highlights: 1 - Johnson: “We've all made a big mistake in Europe, as soon as it was clear that Trump had got into a trap in the Gulf, that there was a kind of checkmate in the Straits, we should have realised that Europe should try as much as possible, within reason, to help America and help America get out of the mess. There's no doubt that this is a mess, right? I don't understand how the Pentagon thought they could do this…”

@DanNeidle he'll only treat you well until it's not in his interests.

Here’s what we know and what we don’t know about Mr Tice’s taxes. taxpolicy.org.uk/2026/04/13/ric… Haven’t had a single tax adviser say we’re getting this wrong.

I hope @Nigel_Farage retracts this false statement. I did not say Mr Tice paid the full amount. I said we don’t know what tax Mr Tice and his offshore trust paid. And the “little bit more” is an invention.

NEW: The former heads of CISA and NCSC — the two most senior civilian cyber defense officials in the US and UK — now work at the same Oxford school, in the same program, funded by the same Soviet-born billionaire. His name is Len Blavatnik. His business history is the story. 🧵

Britain believes that the ceasefire needs to be extended to include Lebanon and has described Israeli strikes as 'completely wrong' It's another point of tension with the US and Israel Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary: 'What Israel was doing yesterday with these strikes was completely wrong 'We've seen the mass displacement of civilians with significant humanitarian consequences 'This escalation is damaging, it is going in the wrong direction. We want the ceasefire extended to cover Lebanon'

@atrupar JD Vance is accusing Europe of foreign election interference while he’s in Hungary, interfering in the country’s elections. You can’t make this stuff up.

@rachelvscott At what point does the US Congress decide that ww3 isn't something they want?

When I asked about civilian infrastructure. The president said "I don't want to talk about that."

Spoke with President Trump. He told me the conflict should be over in days, not weeks but if no deal is made he’s blowing up the whole country with “very little” off the table. "If happens, it happens. And if it doesn't, we're blowing up the whole country,” he said. I asked if there’s anything off limits. “Very little,” he said.

Nobody wants World War III. Let me be very clear about that. And yet here we are. Trump has spent years ridiculing our allies. Treating NATO partners like adversaries and now he wants those same people to send their frigates into the Strait of Hormuz alongside us. Germany's Defense Minister Pistorius said it most plainly. What does Trump expect a handful of European frigates to do in the Strait of Hormuz that the most powerful Navy in the history of the world cannot do on its own? Answer that question. I'll wait. Keir Starmer said this was never going to be a NATO mission and I think the Europeans are making exactly the right call by staying out. Because here's the escalation scenario that terrifies me. Europeans get pulled in. China feels compelled to respond. Russia sees an opening. And suddenly a regional conflict becomes something that nobody alive has ever seen before. World War III. Now someone needs to find the exit ramp before ego and improvisation make that conversation impossible.

Y’all will never convince me this is normal.

NATO is a defence alliance to ensure support if a member is attacked, not a gang who agree to join in if one idiot launches an illegal and unplanned attack on another country. Everyone knows this except the most powerful man in the world.

@StickToCricket Me

Who should open the batting for England? 🤔

Re-upping what I wrote about Tiger in my 2023 book "LIV and Let Die": On February 23, 2021, something dark visited Tiger Woods. He was in southern California, having just served as the ceremonial host of the Genesis Invitational at Riviera Country Club while recovering from yet another back surgery. On that fateful Tuesday morning, he had to be up early to film some content for Golf Digest at Rolling Hills Country Club. Woods was traveling east on a hilly, winding portion of Hawthorne Boulevard in Palos Verdes; the street curved right but he went dead straight, plowing through the median, careening across the two oncoming lanes of traffic, hopping a curb, knocking down a wooden sign, plunging down an embankment, and smashing into a tree. “There were several rollovers during that process,” said Los Angeles County sheriff Alex Villanueva. Two days earlier, Woods had made a cameo in CBS’s eighteenth-hole tower, sending shock waves through golf Twitter with his glassy eyes, bloated face, and slurred speech, particularly troubling signs given his previous treatment for an addiction to painkillers. In the wake of the crash, he steadfastly refused to fill in any details, batting away questions by saying, “It’s all in the police report.” Indeed it is: at the time of the crash he was traveling an estimated eighty-four to eighty-seven miles per hour, more than double the speed limit in the residential area. The most troubling detail? The car’s black box revealed that Woods had kept stepping on the accelerator throughout the crash and that the pressure applied to the pedal had remained at 99 percent. That could not have happened if he had fallen asleep at the wheel or been momentarily distracted by his phone.

@RoryStewartUK Probably opportunistic rather than planned from the start

It is so difficult to understand why Trump launched his Iran operation - an op so clearly damaging to US national interests, the global economy, Ukraine and the US’ closest allies in Europe and the Gulf. Then there is this….