The Foreign Office’s most senior civil servant is stepping down after it emerged that his department failed to inform the Prime Minister that Lord Mandelson had not passed security vetting for the role of UK ambassador to the United States.
The BBC understands that Sir Keir Starmer and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper had lost confidence in Sir Olly Robbins, with his departure effectively amounting to a dismissal following a Guardian investigation revealing that Mandelson had not been security cleared.
The Prime Minister is now facing calls to resign, amid accusations that he misled MPs when he told Parliament that “full due process” had been followed.
However, senior minister Darren Jones has insisted that Sir Keir was not informed of the vetting recommendation until Tuesday this week, denied that he misled Parliament, and said the Prime Minister has no intention of stepping down.
Lord Mandelson was first announced as the UK’s ambassador to the US in December 2024, before full vetting had been completed. He formally took up the post on 10 February 2025.
Just seven months later, he was removed from the role over his links to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
On Thursday, the government confirmed that the Foreign Office had gone against the recommendation of the Cabinet Office’s security vetting agency, allowing Lord Mandelson to assume the post despite the concerns raised. By 11pm that same day, it was confirmed that Sir Olly Robbins was leaving his position.
The fallout continued on Friday, when Foreign Affairs Select Committee chair Dame Emily Thornberry invited Sir Olly to appear before MPs next week, marking what would be his second appearance over his role in the unfolding controversy.
Speaking to Sky News, she said she wanted clarity on whether decisions had been made independently or influenced by others.
“Was it his own idea, or was he being leant on elsewhere? Or was he, as a civil servant, acting under direction from elsewhere, and if so, by whom?” she asked.
Dame Emily also pointed to what she described as carefully worded correspondence from Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, which stated only that the vetting process had “concluded” with clearance being granted.
“It says he was vetted, and it says he was appointed, but it doesn’t say it was overridden… people have basically been told half the story,” she added.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of misleading the public, questioning why Foreign Office officials would override security vetting advice.
Speaking to the BBC, she said: “They must think everybody is stupid. Why would officials overrule an appointment of a politician?”
She added that Mandelson was not a civil servant but a political appointee, calling the handling of the process “inexplicable” and suggesting it pointed to deeper accountability failures.
“All roads lead to resignation — at some point there has been deliberate dishonesty,” she said.
Minister Darren Jones, speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, said no minister had been informed at the time of either the vetting recommendation or the decision to overrule it.
He also noted that, under existing rules, there was no requirement for ministers to be notified of security vetting outcomes.
Responding to claims that it was implausible Sir Olly would not have informed senior ministers or the Prime Minister, Jones said: “I find this whole situation astonishing as well.”
He added that he had immediately suspended the exemption allowing such decisions to be taken without ministerial awareness.
Pressed on whether the Foreign Office had misled the Prime Minister, Jones said: “The Foreign Office did not tell the Prime Minister that they had granted developed vetting status to Peter Mandelson against the advice of the security vetting process.”
He said Sir Keir only became aware of the full details on Tuesday evening during the review of documents being prepared for publication to MPs.
Jones also explained that ministers were not permitted to view vetting files due to the sensitive and intrusive nature of the process, which is handled by specialist security professionals.
He added that the Prime Minister had intended to address Parliament next Monday after reviewing all the facts, but had been forced to respond earlier following the Guardian report.
On why Sir Keir did not immediately raise the issue at Prime Minister’s Questions, Jones said the Prime Minister had instead requested full documentation from the head of the civil service to ensure accuracy before speaking to MPs.
Opposition parties have intensified pressure on the Prime Minister, with Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey calling for an investigation by the Commons Privileges Committee to determine whether Parliament was misled.
He said it was “inconceivable” that ministers would not have been aware of the vetting decision and argued that responsibility ultimately rested with the Prime Minister.
“I don’t think the Prime Minister can get out of his responsibility by sacking Olly Robbins. The buck has to stop with Keir Starmer,” he said.
He added that the evidence suggested Parliament and the public had been misled, describing it as a serious breach of parliamentary rules.
Reform UK, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru have also called for the Prime Minister’s resignation, accusing him of dishonesty over the vetting process.
Reform leader Nigel Farage told LBC that Sir Olly Robbins was “one of the most professional civil servants in this country” and said it was implausible he would have acted alone.
He accused officials of being made a “sacrificial lamb” in an effort to shield the Prime Minister.
Meanwhile, the Scottish National Party has written to the independent adviser on ministerial standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, calling for an investigation into whether Sir Keir knowingly misled the public.
SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said: “The Prime Minister is either incompetent, gullible or a liar — or all three.”
During Prime Minister’s Questions on 10 September 2025, Sir Keir Starmer stated three times that “full due process” had been followed in relation to Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
Under the Ministerial Code, any minister who knowingly misleads Parliament is expected to resign.
Speaking to journalists after a press conference in Hastings on 5 February, Sir Keir also said that “security vetting carried out independently by the security services” had been conducted and that it was a thorough process which granted Lord Mandelson clearance before taking up the role.
The disclosures surrounding the vetting process have since reignited public criticism of the appointment and raised fresh questions over the Prime Minister’s judgement.
Sir Keir is expected to address the matter in the House of Commons on Monday.
Sir Olly, a senior civil servant and former chief Brexit negotiator under Theresa May, was appointed permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office in January 2025.
Earlier, Labour MP Emily Thornberry, chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, said she felt “misled” by Sir Olly’s evidence to the committee last November regarding Lord Mandelson’s vetting.
“We gave them direct questions and they half answered it, but they missed out the bit that was important… he didn’t pass the vetting,” she told the BBC.
Sources close to Morgan McSweeney, the Prime Minister’s former chief adviser who resigned in February over his role in the appointment process, told the BBC he was not aware of the final outcome of the vetting procedure.
The developed vetting process, carried out by UK Security Vetting within the Cabinet Office, is designed to ensure individuals are suitable to access sensitive information and are not vulnerable to coercion, bribery, or blackmail. It includes checks on financial history, criminal records, and other background information, as well as interviews covering personal and professional matters.
According to BBC reporting, Lord Mandelson was not informed of the conclusions reached during his vetting process at the time, and no concerns were raised with him following his interview.
In February, the government agreed to release documents relating to his appointment after MPs voted for their publication.
However, the Guardian reported that senior officials had considered withholding documents showing that Lord Mandelson did not receive vetting approval from security authorities.
A government spokesperson said ministers remained committed to complying fully with Parliament’s request and would release the documents “in full as soon as possible”.
Sir Keir was reportedly “furious” after learning on Tuesday evening that Lord Mandelson had failed vetting during the review of documents prepared for publication.
The BBC also understands that David Lammy, who was Foreign Secretary at the time of the appointment, was not informed that the Foreign Office had overruled the vetting decision until Thursday afternoon.