Speeches by Anderson.

“With the benefit of hindsight and many months to look at this and to think about the whole process, where did the process go wrong? Was it at the early stage of even considering him, was it the due diligence, or was it the vetting?”

“No—let’s make this very clear.”

“What was the outcome of that due diligence? Was that the important factor between the two, one going before another?”

“In your due diligence meetings with Peter Mandelson, and when you subsequently asked for more in writing, how many times did you meet him, and how long were your meetings with him for the due diligence?”

“I know you were not there at the interview. Do you think he was asked enough open questions or had the ability to give the full extent of his relationship?”

“Is there any record of that meeting where you established that the Foreign Secretary was happy with that?”

“I have one more question—one more piece of the puzzle—going back to access talks that you held before the election with people who were then shadow Ministers. Did the issue of political appointments, including the appointment of the ambassador to the US or appointing Peter Mandelson, come up in access talks, and would …”

“At the two dinners and lunches that you attended, did Peter Mandelson lobby you about becoming the ambassador to the US?”

“Okay. We are trying to get to the bottom of who really proposed Mandelson’s appointment. You have said you were sorry for your part in it, but also that, before you started in post after the election, there were some access talks. You referred to access talks in January 2024, which you were not party to, but which happ…”

“In the process you have talked about, George Osborne and Peter Mandelson were the two names in play. How far did the process of George Osborne’s potential appointment, which then did not lead on, go? Did he have due diligence assessment made of him?”

“Did you attend any of Peter Mandelson’s private dinners that he hosted in his house or in restaurants? He held monthly dinners for political people. It is just reported; I have not been to any of these, and I don’t think anyone here has, but have you been to any of those dinners?”

“By PET—and by writing to you?”

“That was the due diligence report that is now in the Humble Address papers that we have all seen. Is that the report you are talking about?”

“Finally from me, about the documentation of this process, decisions of this magnitude should not be done informally on the sofa. At previous Committee sessions, Members have become aware of a lack of some papers. Today, it has been referred to that the Prime Minister received a lot of views, and we do not have any pape…”

“In the due diligence, there are obviously issues that were then taken up in the security vetting, but there also issues about reputational risk. Would they have been part of the security vetting or would there have been another process to look further into the reputational risk, which is more a political decision than …”

“In this case, in your role as chief operating officer going forward, and in looking at how we operate on this in the future—and that Ministers and the Prime Minister are given all the advice they need—this may be an area that is looked at. Unusual appointments like this are where it really comes to the crux, and there …”

“That is helpful, because we are seeing him next week, we hope. As you are gathering the documents, and you get them in and look at them, are you able to go back and say, “There seem to be some missing documents,” and investigate a little bit more in your document gathering?”

“I suppose I am really asking this because I was a Minister. Every single conversation I had felt like it was definitely being documented very, very well, but I don’t know about chiefs of staff to Prime Ministers. Are all of their meetings documented in the same way that Ministers’ are?”

“So do you think there are any missing documents around those decisions? Have you asked any questions about more evidence of meetings by Morgan McSweeney before he even said to the Prime Minister that he should consider going forward with even the due diligence and even the security vetting—so, the early stages? Do you …”

“Thank you. The next question is about the letter to Sir Clive Alderton, who is the private secretary to the King, from Philip Barton, recommending the political appointment of HM Ambassador. I know you have read so many documents. You can’t be expected to know the details of all of them, but in this document, it says: …”