Politics

[Sweep]

1 hour ago, Traf said:

Elsewhere...

Doesn't need to be costed - stuff like this is a vote winner with the Reform m0ngs, obviously when it doesn't happen, it'll be the fault of EU/Labour Party/Conservative Party/ECHR/Civil Service*

 

*delete as applicable

Edited 2 hours ago by Sweep

[Ani]

So the Civil Service think they followed the rules and had no obligation to inform Starmer of the results. 
 

You do not fail vetting as such but a series of risks are assessed and these are deemed to be serious or not. If they are serious the Foreign Office decides internally if the risks can be managed or mitigated. If they think they are able to be managed or mitigated then the appointment goes ahead. 
 

Only a very restricted group of people see the actual vetting as it is strictly confidential, so Starmer would not have known and the idea he lied is seemingly nonsense.

What is coming clear that not many, if any senior politicians fully understand the process and it certainly adds to idea of an inner sanctum of unelected officials with too much power. 
 

Olly Robbins seems to think they did everything right and nothing untoward happened. Ironically Starmer sacking him might open KS to more criticism as Robbins was ‘only doing his job and following the rules’ . 
 

It just seems this Govt have an unfortunate habit of shooting itself in the foot. The flags in the vetting did not relate to Epstein so god knows what it is to do with. But at the end of the day Starmers judgement was that Mandelson with all his baggage was a suitable choice (and apparently doing a good job) but he is clearly highly damaged in a political and diplomatic sense. Terrible judgement by KS. 
 

 

[frank_spencer]

Just now, Ani said:

So the Civil Service think they followed the rules and had no obligation to inform Starmer of the results. 
 

You do not fail vetting as such but a series of risks are assessed and these are deemed to be serious or not. If they are serious the Foreign Office decides internally if the risks can be managed or mitigated. If they think they are able to be managed or mitigated then the appointment goes ahead. 
 

Only a very restricted group of people see the actual vetting as it is strictly confidential, so Starmer would not have known and the idea he lied is seemingly nonsense.

What is coming clear that not many, if any senior politicians fully understand the process and it certainly adds to idea of an inner sanctum of unelected officials with too much power. 
 

Olly Robbins seems to think they did everything right and nothing untoward happened. Ironically Starmer sacking him might open KS to more criticism as Robbins was ‘only doing his job and following the rules’ . 
 

It just seems this Govt have an unfortunate habit of shooting itself in the foot. The flags in the vetting did not relate to Epstein so god knows what it is to do with. But at the end of the day Starmers judgement was that Mandelson with all his baggage was a suitable choice (and apparently doing a good job) but he is clearly highly damaged in a political and diplomatic sense. Terrible judgement by KS. 
 

 

Links to China apparently.

[Ani]

6 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Doesn't need to be costed - stuff like this is a vote winner with the Reform m0ngs, obviously when it doesn't happen, it'll be the fault of EU/Labour Party/Conservative Party/ECHR/Civil Service*

 

*delete as applicable

The debacle re Mandelson plays very much into the hands of the challenger parties such as Reform and Greens, then Plaid in Wales and the SNP. Their message is simple ‘ the established interests in Westminster need changing.’ 

[Zulu]

4 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

Links to China apparently.

China and Russia. He had his grubby little fingers in many pies. 
Allegedly. 

[Sweep]

Just now, Ani said:

The debacle re Mandelson plays very much into the hands of the challenger parties such as Reform and Greens, then Plaid in Wales and the SNP. Their message is simple ‘ the established interests in Westminster need changing.’ 

I don't think that message is wrong to be honest - we're now entering an era of multi party parliament, like they have in other countries. It'll be interesting to see what (if any) alliances are formed moving forward. No doubt, some seats will go uncontested, so as not to split the votes - and I suspect that Reform will be the target of everybody.

Apparently though, Rupert Lowe is attracting quite a few members, from folk who think Reform are going a bit soft, so maybe Restore will be in the mix as well

[Sweep]

7 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

Links to China apparently.

Indeed, he has a 21% share holding in a company called Global Council, and their largest client is WuXi AppTec, to the tune of around £2.5M

Quote

Chinese company WuXi AppTec has sponsored events with China's military, reportedly stolen U.S. IP, and jointly operated genetic collection sites with China's military

WuXi paid £1.42M to Global Council just as Mandleson was appointed Ambassador. 

 

It may well amount to nothing, but it doesn't look good.....and I'm surprised the US didn't kick up a fuss, as I'm sure they'd have done some "research" on Mandleson as well