The former top official at the UK's Foreign Office has said there was a "dismissive approach" to Peter Mandelson's security vetting from Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office.
Olly Robbins, who was sacked by Mr Starmer last week over the failure to disclose Mr Mandelson’s failed security checks - but he was granted developed vetting (DV) clearance anyway, said there was pressure from Downing Street to clear the appointment.
He told MPs that there was a "very, very strong expectation" from No 10 that Mr Mandelson "needed to be in post and in America as quickly as humanly possible".
The former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office said that when he took on that role in January 2025, the DV process was already under way.
"Due diligence (which assesses reputational suitability and checks if a candidate is fit to serve) had been completed by the Cabinet Office," he said.
"Mandelson was being granted access to highly classified briefing on a case-by-case basis," he added.
He said this "resulted in a dismissive approach to DV" from Number 10, which is Mr Starmer's office.
"Nonetheless, despite this atmosphere of pressure, the department completed DV to the normal high standard," he said.
Mr Mandelson was granted DV status despite the concerns raised by UK Security Vetting, the expert agency which carries out checks.
Mr Robbins said he had not seen the UKSV document relating to Mr Mandelson, but was briefed on its finding by the Foreign Office’s security chief.
He told MPs he was briefed that UKSV considered Mr Mandelson a "borderline" case, "leaning towards recommending that clearance be denied".
The risks in his case did not relate to the peer’s links to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, Mr Robbins said.
The Foreign Office’s security chief assessed that the risks could be "managed and mitigated".
In a letter to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee ahead of his appearance, Mr Robbins said: "DV clearance is a risk judgment. This is especially true the more senior a candidate is and the longer their career.
"Managing these risks as part of the clearance process is not unusual."
He said he therefore agreed with the Foreign Office’s estates security and network directorate (ESND) approach, and clearance was granted.
That meant that when Mr Starmer told MPs the "proper process had been followed … he was correct".
The UK Prime Minister endured two-and-a-half hours of questions from MPs yesterday in which he complained he had only found out about UKSV’s concerns last week.
He blamed the sacked senior civil servant for "deliberately" and repeatedly keeping him in the dark over the failure to receive the green light from UKSV.
Mr Robbins said ministers were not usually informed of any findings from the vetting process apart from the outcome, and "my guiding principle has been to defend the integrity of a system designed to protect UK national security".
He said he had considered asking to see the UKSV documentation after Mr Mandelson was sacked in September last year.
"My team consulted the Cabinet Office and were told that I required a national security justification," he said.
Mr Robbins said "subsequent discussions" between the Foreign Office and Cabinet Office "reflected different views on this matter, but I decided to adhere to normal practice and did not pursue this further".
Read more: Starmer says he was wrong to name Mandelson as US envoy
