Foreign Office official Ian Collard will not appear in person before a committee of MPs to answer questions about the vetting process for Lord Peter Mandelson’s appointment as UK ambassador to Washington.
Dame Emily Thornberry had requested that the civil servant speak to the Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday, but confirmed on Saturday he would submit written answers instead.
Sir Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney is due to appear on Tuesday, and the committee has already heard from sacked Foreign Office chief Sir Olly Robbins and Cabinet Office permanent secretary Cat Little.
Mr Collard is a former ambassador to Lebanon and Panama and was appointed the Foreign Office’s chief property and security officer in March 2023.
It was Mr Collard who Sir Olly said briefed him on the vetting findings that deemed Lord Mandelson a borderline case and leaned towards recommending that clearance be denied.
Ian Collard will be giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee in writing.
— Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) April 25, 2026
I have written to the interim Permanent Under Secretary at the Foreign Office setting out the questions we wish Mr Collard to answer. https://t.co/3Qv9e0amyw pic.twitter.com/UlInmpzbfZ
Dame Emily has asked Mr Collard to detail his recollection of this meeting and whether it lines up with Sir Olly’s evidence, in a letter to the Foreign Office setting out questions to be answered by 5pm on Monday.
She also asked Mr Collard to set out the following:
– Whether he felt under pressure to deliver Lord Mandelson’s clearance, after Sir Olly said there was an “atmosphere of pressure” and “constant chasing” from Downing Street.
– Whether he had seen the cover form for Lord Mandelson’s vetting by UK Security Vetting (UKSV), the agency responsible for checks on candidates for sensitive posts, in which it had ticked two red boxes – meaning they had “high concern” and recommended “clearance denied or withdrawn”.
– If he was asked by anyone in the Foreign Office, Downing Street or the Cabinet Office for advice about whether Lord Mandelson required vetting for the post given he was a member of the House of Lords
– If he advised on how Lord Mandelson should be treated during the period between his appointment being announced and his clearance coming through.
Sir Olly said that when he took over in the Foreign Office on January 20, Lord Mandelson was already being granted access to “highly classified briefings” on a case-by-case basis – without his security clearance being confirmed.
He said he had never seen the UKSV form when making the decision on Lord Mandelson’s clearance but was briefed on the vetting.
Ms Little told the committee that there had been an initial discussion over whether Lord Mandelson needed security vetting at all because he was a member of the House of Lords.
Sir Keir has maintained that Sir Olly was wrong not to have told him the outcome of the so-called developed vetting process and insisted he would not have gone ahead with having the peer as his top diplomat to Washington had he known.
