Paul Lewis

We've never had a scenario like this before, where you have had an ambassador to Washington being sacked.

Lots of questions around the vetting process, you know, unprecedented levels of scrutiny around the vetting process.

And then in tandem with that, you have growing concerns in Parliament that the government is not complying with its wishes.

Complaints about potential cover up, information being withheld.

And I think essentially, you know, the position we've taken on this is that we've established this information.

We believe that the public and Parliament has a right to know it.

And in recent days, it's become apparent to us that despite Parliament's motion, this information may not have been disclosed to the public.

And we essentially think the public has a right to know.

Thank you.

This is The Guardian.

The notion that senior officials could make a decision of this magnitude and not inform a minister, let alone the Prime Minister, I think will strike many people as extraordinary.

All of this just raises the question about, you know, who is in charge?

Is it the people we elect to government, to parliament?

Or is it, you know, officialdom, the state, the national security establishment?

I mean, for me, that's the heart of this question.

Okay.

Well, I mean, I guess the key fact, the one that led late last night to the resignation of the permanent secretary in the Foreign Office, the key fact that has proven such a huge controversy for the prime minister right now is that after the point at which Peter Mandelson was announced as Starmer's pick for Washington...

He had to undergo a security vetting process.

Exactly.

So the prime minister announces he's going to be ambassador to the US in December 2024.