Steerpike Steerpike

Watch: Robbins drops Doyle bombshell

Credit: Parliament TV

Oh dear. It seems that Keir Starmer’s strategy has, er, backfired once again. Having spent yesterday afternoon declaring to all and sundry that he was shocked, SHOCKED to discover that Peter Mandelson might have been a wrong ‘un, it was left to Olly Robbins this morning to deliver his response. With the calm demeanour of a man who has spent a lifetime in the corridors of power, Sir Olly duly filleted the Prime Minister for two hours. In the battle of wits, only one man came unarmed…

There were plenty of enjoyable moments for Mr S to chew over. He revealed that the Cabinet Office – the supposed brain of Whitehall – had not ever been keen on vetting Mandelson. He hinted that he himself was misled about the peer’s UK Security Vetting outcome, insisting that he did not see the UKSV document personally. So much for No. 10’s insinuation that Robbins was a rogue actor. But Steerpike’s personal highlight was when he casually dropped in the fact that Downing Street pushed the Foreign Office to find a diplomatic role for Starmer’s underwhelming communications chief – over the head of the-then Foreign Secretary in March 2025. Robbins said:

There were several discussions initiated by No. 10 with me about potentially finding a head of mission opportunity for Matthew Doyle, who was then the prime minister’s director of communications. I was under strict instruction not to discuss that with the then Foreign Secretary which was uncomfortable.

Over to David Lammy, Starmer’s now-deputy for his thoughts on that. You can watch the moment below:

Would Starmer have really blocked Mandelson’s appointment? Tim Shipman discusses the vetting row on the latest Coffee House Shots podcast:

Steerpike
Written by
Steerpike

Steerpike is The Spectator's gossip columnist, serving up the latest tittle tattle from Westminster and beyond. Email tips to steerpike@spectator.co.uk or message @MrSteerpike

This article originally appeared in the UK edition

Topics in this article

Comments