키르 스탈머, 맨델슨 신원조회 스캔들 투표에 직면 - 주요 인물들이 의원들에게 증거 제출 - 영국 정치 라이브
Keir Starmer to face vote on Mandelson vetting scandal as key figures give evidence to MPs - UK politics live
투표에서 이기는 것은 쉬워야 합니다. 여기 피파 크레러의 밤샘 예보 기사입니다. 케미 베이더놀이 제출한 동의안에 대한 투표와 다른 5개 야당(자유민주당, SNP, DUP, 복원 영국, TUV)의 의원들과 수많은 무소속 의원들이 스탈머를 특권위원회에 회부하는 투표의 사건들을 다룹니다.
노동당 의원들은 동의안에 반대 투표하도록 3중선 채찍질을 받았으며, 정부는 쉽게 이길 것입니다. 총무당의 채찍질자인 조나선 레이놀즈는 어젯밤 스카이 뉴스에 "우리는 이것을 부결시킬 것"이라고 말했습니다.
토론을 여는 베이더노는 의원들과 국민을 설득하기를 원하며, 스탈머가 피터 맨델슨의 미국 대사 임명에 관해 하원에 거짓말을 했다고 주장합니다. 마치 보리스 존슨이 파티게이트에 관해 의원들에게 거짓말을 한 것처럼 말입니다. 이것은 상당한 도전이 될 것입니다. 스탈머가 의원들을 의도적으로 오도했다는 증거는 약하고, 존슨과의 비교는 정확하지 않습니다. 노동당은 오늘의 투표가 다음 주 지방선거 앞의 요식행위일 뿐이라고 말하고 있습니다. 이 아침 라디오 4 오늘 프로그램에서 그림자 내각실 장관 알렉스 부르그하트는 이 주장을 부인하며 "정치적 게임은 여기서 일어나지 않고 있습니다"라고 말했습니다. 그는 의원들이 라디오 4에서의 거짓말로 특권위원회에 회부될 수 없다는 것이 운이 좋습니다.
하지만 맨델슨 사건은 정말로 스탈머가 의원들을 오도했는지 여부에 관한 것이 아닙니다. 국민과 대부분의 의원들의 견해에서, 실제 문제는 스탈머가 처음부터 맨델슨을 임명했다는 것입니다. 그 후 2주 전에 스탈머는 가디언이 롭스가 맨델슨의 신원조회 승인을 승인했지만 맨델슨과 인터뷰한 영국 신원조회 팀은 원래 신원조회를 거부해야 한다고 권장했다는 것을 밝힌 후 외교부 상임 차관 올리 롭스를 해고함으로써 문제를 악화시켰습니다. 롭스는 당시 그것을 알지 못했으며, 그를 해고하기로 한 결정은 현재 매우 부당하다고 널리 여겨집니다.
이 아침, 하원 토론이 시작되기 전에, 하원 외교위원회는 두 명의 증인으로부터 증거를 들을 것입니다. 맨델슨이 처음부터 어떻게 임명되게 되었는지에 대해 훨씬 더 많은 것을 밝힐 것입니다. 그들은 전 외교부 상임 차관 필립 바튼과 스탈머의 전 수석 참모 모건 맥스위니입니다. 맥스위니의 증거가 가장 흥미로워야 합니다. 왜냐하면 그는 스탈머가 노동당 지도자가 되고 총리가 되는 것을 돕는 데 중요한 역할을 했기 때문입니다. 그리고 그는 이런 식으로 공개적으로 길게 질문받은 적이 없습니다. 스탈머가 하원 투표에서 거의 확실히 이기겠지만, 위원회 증거는 그가 자신의 의원들에게 어떻게 보여지는지에 더 중요한 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다.
오늘의 일정입니다.
오전 9시: 필립 바튼, 전 외교부 상임 차관이 하원 외교위원회에 증거 제출.
오전: 키르 스탈머 내각 소집.
오전 11시: 모건 맥스위니, 키르 스탈머의 전 수석 참모가 외교위원회에 증거 제출.
정오: 다우닝 스트리트 로비 브리핑 개최.
오후 12시 40분 이후: 보수당 지도자 케미 베이더노가 키르 스탈머를 특권위원회에 회부하는 토론을 개시. 의원들은 오후 7시에 투표합니다.
오후: 스탈머 정부의 중동 대응 위원회 회의 소집.
오후 3시 이후: 상원이 아동 복지 및 학교 법안에 대한 하원 수정안에 투표.
저와 연락을 원하시면, 댓글이 열려 있을 때(오전 10시에서 오후 3시 사이) 아래 라인에 메시지를 게시하거나 소셜 미디어에서 저에게 메시지를 보내주십시오. 저는 모든 BTL 메시지를 읽을 수는 없지만, 메시지에 "Andrew"를 넣으면 저는 그 단어를 포함하는 게시물을 검색하기 때문에 그것을 볼 가능성이 더 높습니다.
긴급하게 어떤 것을 알리고 싶다면 소셜 미디어를 사용하는 것이 가장 좋습니다. 당신은 Bluesky에서 @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social에서 저를 도달할 수 있습니다. 가디언은 X의 공식 계정에서 게시하는 것을 포기했지만, 개별 가디언 기자들은 거기에 있고, 저는 여전히 내 계정을 가지고 있으며, 당신이 @AndrewSparrow에서 저에게 메시지를 보내면, 저는 그것을 보고 필요하면 응답할 것입니다.
사소한 오타도 포함하여 독자들이 실수를 지적해주는 것을 매우 도움이 됩니다. 너무 작은 오류는 없습니다. 그리고 당신의 질문들도 매우 흥미롭습니다. 모두에게 회신할 수 있다고 약속할 수는 없지만, 가능한 한 많은 사람들에게 회신하려고 노력할 것입니다. BTL에서 또는 때로는 블로그에서.
어젯밤 외교위원회는 외교부로부터 긴 메모를 발표했습니다. 맨델슨 임명 당시 외교부의 보안 책임자였던 이안 콜라드에게 제출한 질문들에 대한 답변을 제공합니다. 콜라드는 맨델슨 신원조회 인터뷰의 결과를 올리 롭스에게 설명하고 신원조회를 승인하도록 권장한 사람입니다. 신원조회 인터뷰에서 강조된 위험이 관리될 수 있기 때문입니다.
여기 문서에 관한 헨리 다이어의 기사입니다.
claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
752 tokens
$0.00215
5.6s
claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
5,771 tokens
$0.01383
28.4s
Morgan McSweeney among those giving evidence to foreign affairs committee ahead of Commons vote Good morning. The former US president Lyndon Johnson is credited with saying the most important skill in politics is knowing how to count, meaning that ultimately what matters is being able to win a vote. But sometimes in politics what matters just as much, or even more, is the ability to win the argument. Today Keir Starmer will be tested on both these measures.Winning the vote should be easy. Here is our overnight preview story by Pippa Crerar on the events setting up today’s vote on a motion tabled by Kemi Badenoch, as well as MPs from five other opposition parties (the Lib Dems, the SNP, the DUP, Restore Britain, TUV) and a string of independents, referring Starmer to the privileges committee.
Good morning. The former US president Lyndon Johnson is credited with saying the most important skill in politics is knowing how to count, meaning that ultimately what matters is being able to win a vote. But sometimes in politics what matters just as much, or even more, is the ability to win the argument. Today Keir Starmer will be tested on both these measures.Winning the vote should be easy. Here is our overnight preview story by Pippa Crerar on the events setting up today’s vote on a motion tabled by Kemi Badenoch, as well as MPs from five other opposition parties (the Lib Dems, the SNP, the DUP, Restore Britain, TUV) and a string of independents, referring Starmer to the privileges committee.
Labour MPs are on a three-line whip to vote against the motion, and the government should win easily. “We’ll vote it down,” Jonathan Reynolds, the chief whip, told Sky News last night.
Badenoch, who will be opening the debate, is hoping to persuade MPs, and the public, that Starmer lied to the Commons over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US, just as Boris Johnson lied to MPs about Partygate. That will be quite a challenge; the case for Starmer deliberately misleading MPs is flimsy, and the comparison to Johnson is wide of the mark. Labour is saying the vote today is just a stunt ahead of next week’s local elections. On the Today programme this morning Alex Burghart, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, dismissed this claim, saying: “There aren’t any political games going on here.” He is lucky MPs can’t get referred to the privileges committee for lying to Radio 4.
But the Mandelson affair isn’t really about whether Starmer misled MPs. In the view of the public, and most MPs, the real problem is that Starmer appointed Mandelson in the first place. Then, two weeks ago, Starmer compounded the problem by sacking Olly Robbins as permanent secretary to the Foreign Office after the Guardian revealed that Robbins approved Mandelson’s security vetting clearance even though the UK Security Vetting team who interviewed Mandelson originally recommended that vetting should be denied. Robbins did not know that at the time, and the decision to sack him is now widely seen as grossly unfair.
This morning, before the Commons debate starts, the Commons foreign affairs committee will hear from two witnesses who will give evidence who will probably reveal a lot more about how Mandelson came to be appointed in the first place. They are Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, and Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s former chief of staff. McSweeney’s evidence should be the most interesting, because he was instrumental in helping Starmer become Labour leader, and then prime minister, and he has never questioned at length in public in this sort of way before. While Starmer is almost certain to win the Commons vote, the committee evidence may have a more significant impact on how he is viewed by his MPs.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, gives evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee.
Morning: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
11am: Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff, gives evidence to the foreign affairs committee.
Noon: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
After 12.40pm: Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, opens the debate on referring Keir Starmer to the privileges committee. MPs will vote at 7pm.
Afternoon: Starmer chairs a meeting of the government’s Middle East response committee
After 3pm: Peers vote on Commons amendments to the childrens’ wellbeing and schools bill.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Last night the foreign affairs committee published a long memo from the Foreign Office giving answers to questions it had for Ian Collard, who was head of security at the Foreign Office at the time of the Mandelson appointment. Collard was the person who briefed Olly Robbins on the outcome of the Mandelson vetting interviews and who recommended that vetting should be approved, because the risks highlighted in the vetting interviews could be managed.
Here is Henry Dyer’s story about the document.
Good morning. The former US president Lyndon Johnson is credited with saying the most important skill in politics is knowing how to count, meaning that ultimately what matters is being able to win a vote. But sometimes in politics what matters just as much, or even more, is the ability to win the argument. Today Keir Starmer will be tested on both these measures.
Winning the vote should be easy. Here is our overnight preview story by Pippa Crerar on the events setting up today’s vote on a motion tabled by Kemi Badenoch, as well as MPs from five other opposition parties (the Lib Dems, the SNP, the DUP, Restore Britain, TUV) and a string of independents, referring Starmer to the privileges committee.
Labour MPs are on a three-line whip to vote against the motion, and the government should win easily. “We’ll vote it down,” Jonathan Reynolds, the chief whip, told Sky News last night.
Badenoch, who will be opening the debate, is hoping to persuade MPs, and the public, that Starmer lied to the Commons over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US, just as Boris Johnson lied to MPs about Partygate. That will be quite a challenge; the case for Starmer deliberately misleading MPs is flimsy, and the comparison to Johnson is wide of the mark. Labour is saying the vote today is just a stunt ahead of next week’s local elections. On the Today programme this morning Alex Burghart, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, dismissed this claim, saying: “There aren’t any political games going on here.” He is lucky MPs can’t get referred to the privileges committee for lying to Radio 4.
But the Mandelson affair isn’t really about whether Starmer misled MPs. In the view of the public, and most MPs, the real problem is that Starmer appointed Mandelson in the first place. Then, two weeks ago, Starmer compounded the problem by sacking Olly Robbins as permanent secretary to the Foreign Office after the Guardian revealed that Robbins approved Mandelson’s security vetting clearance even though the UK Security Vetting team who interviewed Mandelson originally recommended that vetting should be denied. Robbins did not know that at the time, and the decision to sack him is now widely seen as grossly unfair.
This morning, before the Commons debate starts, the Commons foreign affairs committee will hear from two witnesses who will give evidence who will probably reveal a lot more about how Mandelson came to be appointed in the first place. They are Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, and Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s former chief of staff. McSweeney’s evidence should be the most interesting, because he was instrumental in helping Starmer become Labour leader, and then prime minister, and he has never questioned at length in public in this sort of way before. While Starmer is almost certain to win the Commons vote, the committee evidence may have a more significant impact on how he is viewed by his MPs.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, gives evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee.
Morning: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
11am: Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff, gives evidence to the foreign affairs committee.
Noon: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
After 12.40pm: Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, opens the debate on referring Keir Starmer to the privileges committee. MPs will vote at 7pm.
Afternoon: Starmer chairs a meeting of the government’s Middle East response committee
After 3pm: Peers vote on Commons amendments to the childrens’ wellbeing and schools bill.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.