Lord Mandelson Humble Address Government Response
2026-06-25
TAGS
Response quality
Questions & Answers
Q1
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The House agreed to a Humble Address on February 4, 2026, and the Government is expected to act on it.
What recent progress has been made on implementing the Humble Address agreed by this House on 4 February 2026?
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.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The specific progress and details are vague; only general statements provided.
We Have Been In The House To Discuss This Matter On 11 Occasions
Response accuracy
Q2
Partial Answer
▸
Context
The Department was willing to appoint Mandelson as ambassador without security vetting despite public knowledge of his links with Russia and China.
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?
With permission, Mr Speaker, may I refer to my 11 previous statements that answered that question?
▸
Assessment & feedback
The question is completely avoided and redirected to previous statements.
May I Refer To My 11 Previous Statements
Response accuracy
Q3
Partial Answer
▸
Context
There are discrepancies between the Government's claim of withholding material at the police request and a Daily Mail report suggesting otherwise.
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?
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.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The question is partially addressed but specific details about discrepancies are avoided.
I Have Been Advised Not To Detail Or Itemise Those Requests
Response accuracy
Q4
Partial Answer
▸
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.
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?
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.
▸
Assessment & feedback
The specific commitment about withheld material not being asked to be kept back explicitly by the Met is avoided.
All Documentation That The Government Hold Has Been Published Except For What Was Requested
Response accuracy