With the Clock of Prorogation ticking down to the End of Term and with no route to any effective form of Parliamentary challenge to the Prime Minister’s Reign of Avoidance, LoTO moved off the Mandelson Agenda for PMQs. Nevertheless, the Force of Evasion is strong with this one and, true to form, the Prime Minister avoided answering any questions at all and instead started listing a rather random selection of things that he blamed the Tories for before darting off in to a bout of self-congratulation for not having joined the Iran war.
In reality it was not the most awful performance from the Prime Minister, merely irrelevant, absurdist nonsense. One wonders if the former DPP ever had to argue a case in an actual court ever, or just shuffled documents around in some shady office for a living. The latter, one suspects.
Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex, Conservative) LoTO opened with “Can the Prime Minister tell us how many more people are out of work and claiming universal credit since he took office?” This could have been wittily answered by “No, I can’t” as the PM did not deign to answer, but instead listed the youth guarantee, national minimum wage, NHS waiting lists, police on the beat and (wait for it!) energy bills as Labour’s achievements, almost as if this was a prepared non-answer that might have been delivered whatever the question. Sigh. Gosh, he’s useless.
However, the best moment came from Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South, SNP) from whom “Depending upon the results in the elections next week, this may well be my final PMQs. I suppose that the same is perhaps true for the Prime Minister as well” was something of a classic, although, as it was both funny and clever, it floated way above the Prime Minister’s head.
The PM now reads his folder of prepared answers rather than listen to the questions. Perhaps he is going deaf?
Tuesday 28th April
Given the PM’s predictable decision to whip Labour MPs over the debate on referring him to the Privileges Committee and given that poor old Darren Jones was once again wheeled out to defend the indefensible with a flat bat, the “emergency” debate was a rather performative demonstration of synthetic outrage. The Prime Minister? Lie to Parliament? Perish the thought.
More interest was to be found in the Grimond Room where the Foreign Affairs Committee heard from Sir Philip Barton GCMG OBE, immediate predecessor to Sir Olli Robins as Head of the Diplomatic Service and then the Prince of Slipperiness himself, Morgan McSweeney. Sadly, however, and in part because Lady Nugee is so terribly pleased with the cold-served dish of revenge her Chairmanship of the FAC has provided, both witnesses were quite dull.
Sir Philip noted that said he had been “presented with a decision” to appoint Lord Mandelson that the Prime Minister had already taken without any opportunity to hear the FC&DO’s concerns. and simply “told to get on with it”. Sir Philip made the most Diplomatic Service distinction ever by declining to support Sir Olly’s suggestion that No 10 had been “dismissive” towards the need for Lord Mandelson to be vetted, choosing instead to describe No 10’s attitude as “uninterested.” This is a more amusing than useful distinction.
Morgan McSweeney has been so rarely seen or heard in public that it was quite interesting just to see him in a Parliamentary context. However, sadly, he seemed rather less impressive than his previous exalted position had suggested. McSweeney accepted that he had made a “serious error of judgement” in supporting Lord Mandelson’s appointment. His far from devastating admission that “there was pressure to get everything done as quickly as possible” but maintained that this had not involved accepting that the vetting process should have been avoided or abbreviated. Yawn.
Monday 27th April
The Commons kicked off with the request from LoTO (and “other honourable and right honourable members across the House”) for an emergency debate on whether the PM had misled the House on following “due process” in the appointment of Lord Mandelson as Ambassador to the US. The Speaker announced that he would allow a debate to be held on Tuesday 28th April.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove, LibDem) Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South,SNP) and Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West, Conservative) immediately pushed the Government (via Hapless Jones) to allow a “free vote” in Tuesday’s debate on the grounds that misleading the House has always been a matter for the House rather than party direction, even in the time of Boris Johnson. Like that’s going to happen…
Given the arithmetic and timetable it seems very unlikely that HMG would even momentarily consider allowing a free vote, which does make the proposed debate a rather pointless process coming, as it does, just a week before the local elections due on 7th May.
Friday 24th April
In the Lords, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill had failed to make it through the committee stage in the 14 days assigned to this process before the end of the session and therefore could not be completed and become law. The process obstacle that derailed the bill were the multiple amendments made by 7 peers:
– Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, a professor of palliative medicine,
– former Paralympian Baroness Grey-Thompson,
– former Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Lord Carlile of Berriew,
– Liz Truss supporter Baroness Coffey (Thérèse Coffey),
– former ConservativeHome journo Lord Goodman of Wycombe,
– former diplomat, banker and RBK&C councillor Lord Moylan and
– elected hereditary peer and former barrister Lord Sandhurst.
Thursday 23rd April (St George’s Day)
Catherine “Cat” Little CB gave evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on the Mandelson appointment in the Grimond Room. Her evidence was less than dramatic as her role as Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet Office dictated. In a performance that must surely see Miss Little elevated to the esteemed ranks of Damehood in the next New Year’s Honours list very little of consequence seemed to be established.
Nevertheless the Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet Office did confirm:
– the FC&DO had refused to provide a summary of the vetting agency’s recommendation on Lord Mandelson because of concerns about the confidentiality of the vetting process so she obtained this summary from the vetting agency instead
– there is no formal record of the PM’s decision to appoint Lord Mandelson.
It transpired, to little consternation, that it was Ms Little’s view that “due process” had been followed in Mandelson’s appointment because it had been the established process that UKSV should make a vetting recommendation, but that FC&DO had the final decision on the provision of security clearance in line with normal practice.
Sadly, however, no-one seems to have asked why, if due process was followed so punctiliously, the Prime Minister had chosen to dismiss Sir Oliver Robbins. If Sir Ollie had followed the established process as Miss Little suggested, it seems odd that the PM thought he should be dismissed. This seems to be a simple question, but the PM has answerphobia, so there’s that.
In the Chamber, hapless Darren Jones, answering oral questions for the Cabinet Office, continued his normal blocking routine in response to questions about the Mandelson appointment process and No 10’s (confidential) request to F&CDO to ascertain whether there were potential ambassadorial appointments suitable for Matthew (now Lord) Doyle. The merry-go-round goes round and round.
Thank you for reading and please check out our instagram @theworldofukpolitics,
Alex
Leave a Reply