Thread 47 Starmer: Vai ficar tudo bem esta noite. Rock and roll.

[DuncinToffee]

Welcome to our long running thread for political discussion, general chit chat, a friendly hug and taxes in kind

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5507723-thread-46-starmer-meloj-kaj-kastoroj-sur-monbiletoj-arbaro-de-kolero?page=40&reply=151658840

That sums up my brain, this morning 😂 The boilerman cometh so I've been whizzing round like a moth trapped in a lampshade getting jobs done before whisking DS2 out of the way because tool boxes make him very anxious and we'll never hear the last of it.

It takes a lot for me to do it but I’ve registered a complaint to the BBC this morning. Hopefully a lot of equally appalled Blue Skyers will join me.

You poor thing - and it was so chilly this morning

We're not quite ready yet - twirly for his bus pass though he's had his shoes on ready for ages. We have a place that he absolutely insists we go to on a Tuesday morning, though, rain or shine.

Anyone remember Mr Ploppy? Seems we have our very own Ploppy the plopper.

I was saving this for the next tax but DS cat's expression after having her temperature taken at the vet pretty sums up my feelings about the state of the world.

I have too

Robbins seems to confirm that Starmer has not lied or deliberately misled the Commons

I haven’t. I can believe it though - she’s had an amazing life and achieved so much.
Edit: the audio book is on Spotify so I’ll start listening in the car! Thanks for the tip. I’m a bit rubbish at reading non fiction but I use audiobooks and podcasts on the long treck to and from choir every Wednesday. If I download I can also listen on the way to Carcassonne on Tuesday.

It seems the Cabinet Office was doing a lot of arm-twisting?

Robbins seems like a decent man.Thornberry asked for the names of the civil servants who were putting pressure on him, but he refused to drop them in it.

You are off to Carcassonne next week? That’s come around quickly. I’m very jealous!

It wasn’t Wormauld - he apparently wasn’t told either.

I can't believe for a moment that Starmer would lie or deliberately mislead Parliament.

His mistake, and it's a big one, was to countenance Mandelson in the first place. I'm with Ed Miliband on this.

It is all still a bit opaque, isn't it?

So apparently Robbins was verbally briefed on the DV and never saw any documentation, he went against the recommendation of UKSV, unilaterally decided that the risks raised by the vetting could be “mitigated” and told nobody any of this, not even his boss, the Cabinet Secretary. He also refuses to say who in No 10 put pressure on him. In other words he completely failed to cover his back. How do people like this get to run government departments?

Planning to do the same.

I find it all very weird. Earlier, Thornberry asked Robbins about his record keeping of telephone calls fron No. 10/Cabinet Office. He said that if he took notes of every call he would be doing nothing else all day, which is true. But on the other hand, you would make a note of significant phone calls to cover your back. Unless you wanted it to remain off the record for some reason.

My feeling is Robbins is covering for someone. And I don't think it is Starmer, because he has no reason to do that?

Having worked with career civil servants I know they keep records of everything. It’s frankly beyond belief that he wouldn’t keep notes of something so sensitive so his back was covered. I’m not finding him convincing.

His reply on phone records did strike a discordant tone.

You are absolutely correct.

This seems to confirm that Starmer didn't know the findings of the security vetting?

Robbins told the committee that he did not accept Keir Starmer’s argument that he should have been given more details of Mandelson’s security vetting.

He said:

"I hope it’s clear from everything I have said so far that I believe that’s a misunderstanding and a dangerous misunderstanding of the necessity of confidentiality of the process.

I’ve been interested, of course, over the last couple of days to read Lord Hague on this today and David Lammy even on Saturday, the former foreign secretary, deputy prime minister, where both have said in different language that they have never had vetting issues discussed with them in all their time as a minister and nor would they expect to.

I’m afraid that’s exactly the culture I have been brought up in. It’s supported by guidance. You are not supposed to share the findings and reports of UKSV other than in the exceptional circumstances where doing so allows for the specific mitigation of risk"

I thought this was interesting:

Asked if he would have done anything differently, Robbins said there were various aspects of the system I think could be improved”.

But he said he was concerned about the way that the British state was “dissecting itself” in public over this.

He said he thought anything that undermined the integrity of the security vetting process could pose a risk to people working in embassies in Moscow or Beijing.

And he said he found himself “wondering who this helps”

Don't we all, Olly...