Speeches by Kumaran.

“I agree. Would you let me ask one final question, Chair? This appointment was a hugely significant decision. It had national and international repercussions, as well as reputational risk. There was a well-publicised friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. The view of the FCDO and the civil service, time and again, has been th…”

“I put on the record that, over the past decade, I have worked twice with the witness—he is used to robust conversations with me. Hello, Morgan. Both Sir Philip Barton and Sir Olly Robbins have said that it was No. 10’s decision to announce the appointment of Peter Mandelson before the vetting process. Did you or did an…”

“Was the Prime Minister led to believe that Peter Mandelson’s risks—the cons, as you have set out—were manageable? Did you have that conversation with him? Did anyone have that conversation with him?”

“As part of that process, did you raise any concerns that you had personally, or any risks that you thought might arise as a result of it?”

“Understood. In your earlier answers, you spoke to the Chair about the pressure to get the ambassador in post before the inauguration.”

“I understand. Do you recall your conversation with Sir Olly regarding the handover of this decision? In that conversation, did you discuss any of the pressures, whether that be time pressure or political pressure?”

“Christmas and other time pressures notwithstanding, that is why you did the process as you did. Would you have briefed anyone else who was considered for that post, if they were not a political appointment? Let us say that it was not Peter Mandelson, and it was not a political appointment, but you knew this was the mos…”

“In your answers today, you said that you didn’t feel that the truth was put forward at the time by Peter Mandelson in his response to your emails. Did you communicate that to the Prime Minister?”

“Okay. On this announcement, you said that the normal order was for the vetting to happen first, and the announcement to happen second. Obviously, you said that it was No. 10’s decision for it to have gone in this order. Did you know that that was going to happen? Were you aware that it was being announced?”

“Did you warn of any risk of proceeding this way? Did you speak to the Foreign Secretary, anyone at No. 10 or anyone else in the Department?”

“Okay. So you didn’t raise with the Prime Minister that you had these concerns. You just put these questions to Peter Mandelson, you got the answers, and that was that.”

“Was the Prime Minister led to believe that Peter Mandelson’s risks—the cons, as you have set out—were manageable? Did you have that conversation with him? Did anyone have that conversation with him?”

“My final question to you, Morgan, is this. Everyone has talked about hindsight. Lots was known about Peter Mandelson before this appointment. I appreciate that you have said you made a judgment call that you have since said was wrong, but there was a very well-publicised friendship with one of the world’s most notoriou…”

“The fact that there are risks in proceeding this way, and that the normal process is for vetting to happen first and the announcement second—that by going ahead with this timeline, which is not the normal process, No. 10 and the Foreign Office could be open to criticism and/or process failures.”

“I have a follow-up to that. Yesterday, the former Foreign Secretary, now Deputy Prime Minister, said—as the Chair said—that he had expressed worries. You said that this was a conversation in the margins. Given how serious an appointment it was, and the level of media scrutiny—rightly—that there was on this appointment,…”

“But there was not any intervention from you.”

“Did you raise any of your concerns with the Foreign Secretary, for him to make a judgment to pass them on, or anything like that? Was there any conversation about the worries that you both seem to have had?”

“Sir Philip, this is a question about judgment and the reasons why Sir Olly left his post. Would you have informed No. 10 or the Prime Minister of the concerns about Peter Mandelson and those leaked emails—the emails released by the US Department for Justice—after the decision to sack Mandelson? If the view from the civ…”

“I agree. Would you let me ask one final question, Chair? This appointment was a hugely significant decision. It had national and international repercussions, as well as reputational risk. There was a well-publicised friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. The view of the FCDO and the civil service, time and again, has been th…”

“I put on the record that, over the past decade, I have worked twice with the witness—he is used to robust conversations with me. Hello, Morgan. Both Sir Philip Barton and Sir Olly Robbins have said that it was No. 10’s decision to announce the appointment of Peter Mandelson before the vetting process. Did you or did an…”