Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response

Thursday 25 June 2026 · 4 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Rebecca Paul asked about the progress on implementing the Humble Address and was told that two sets of documents were published on specific dates, with discussions in the House since then.
  • Rebecca Paul questioned the Department's willingness to appoint Lord Mandelson without security vetting despite his known links to Russia and China, to which the Minister referred to previous statements addressing the same issue.
  • Alex Burghart inquired about discrepancies between the Government and the Metropolitan Police regarding the withholding of certain messages, and the Minister responded that releasing specific documents could hinder the police's criminal investigation.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Rebecca Paul Con Reigate
Parliamentary Procedure
Context

The House agreed to a Humble Address on February 4, 2026, and the Government is expected to act on it.

Question

What recent progress has been made on implementing the Humble Address agreed by this House on 4 February 2026?

Answer from Darren Jones

On 11 March and 1 June, the Government published two tranches of documents. Since then, there have been 11 occasions where this matter was discussed in the House, most recently on 3 June. The material withheld at the request of the Metropolitan police will be released once it is no longer prejudicial to their criminal investigation.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific progress and details are vague; only general statements provided.

How: We Have Been In The House To Discuss This Matter On 11 Occasions

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Rebecca Paul Con Reigate
Safeguarding & DBS Standards & Ethics
Context

The Department was willing to appoint Mandelson as ambassador without security vetting despite public knowledge of his links with Russia and China.

Question

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why his Department was apparently willing to appoint Mandelson as ambassador, providing him access to classified briefings, without conducting any security vetting, given that his close links with Russia and China were already public knowledge before his appointment?

Answer from Darren Jones

With permission, Mr Speaker, may I refer to my 11 previous statements that answered that question?

Not addressed: The question is completely avoided and redirected to previous statements.

How: May I Refer To My 11 Previous Statements

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Alex Burghart Con Brentwood and Ongar
Crime & Law Enforcement Parliamentary Procedure
Context

There are discrepancies between the Government's claim of withholding material at the police request and a Daily Mail report suggesting otherwise.

Question

The Government have always maintained that they withheld material from the Mandelson case only at the request of the Metropolitan police, but two weeks ago, a Daily Mail journalist spoke to the Met who insist that they did not ask for certain messages to be withheld. Can the Chief Secretary explain why the Metropolitan Police and the Government are saying different things?

Answer from Darren Jones

I have been advised not to detail or itemise those requests but instead refer to the categories of documentation requested. The Government do not want to jeopardize the Metropolitan Police's criminal investigation by releasing certain documents, as it could make their work harder.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The question is partially addressed but specific details about discrepancies are avoided.

How: I Have Been Advised Not To Detail Or Itemise Those Requests

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q4 Alex Burghart Con Brentwood and Ongar
Justice & Courts Parliamentary Procedure Standards & Ethics
Context

The House agreed that more information will be released if it does not prejudice the case, yet there is a discrepancy between what the Government says and what the Metropolitan Police request.

Question

Obviously the House does not want to do anything prejudicial to a case, but it appears that the Metropolitan police are saying that some documents could be released without being prejudicial. If there is a criminal trial or even if there isn't one, more information will likely be released. As this has been a particularly novel way of using and responding to a Humble Address, it is likely there will be a Select Committee inquiry into how the process ran. Will the right hon. Gentleman give a commitment now at the Dispatch Box that there is no material that the Government have withheld that the Metropolitan police have not explicitly asked to be withheld?

Answer from Darren Jones

All documentation the Government hold has been published except for what was requested by the Metropolitan Police. The only remaining documentation that will be released is held by the Metropolitan police themselves.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific commitment about withheld material not being asked to be kept back explicitly by the Met is avoided.

How: All Documentation That The Government Hold Has Been Published Except For What Was Requested

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)