The Prime Minister has said the decision not to tell him Lord Peter Mandelson failed security vetting was a "deliberate decision" by officials.
Sir Keir Starmer told the House of Commons that he “could and should” have been told by Foreign Office officials before Lord Mandelson took up the post.
He said he would not have appointed Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US if he had known.
Foreign Office officials took the rare step to overturn security advice despite warnings over the relationship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Prime Minister has been under intense pressure to admit whether he knowingly misled parliament.
Papers published by the Cabinet Office last month show Lord Simon Case told the Prime Minister in November 2024 that he should name his preferred candidate for the post so that “the necessary security clearances” could be completed.
But the Prime Minister did not follow this advice and instead pressed ahead with Lord Mandelson’s appointment, announcing it on December 20, 2024. Concerns were also raised by senior advisers that the process had been rushed.
Addressing the revelations in the Commons, the Prime Minister said: “At the heart of this, there is also a judgment I made that was wrong. I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson.
“I take responsibility for that decision, and I apologise again to the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who were clearly failed by my decision.”
Sir Keir said it was “staggering” he was not told about the recommendations of the UK Security Vetting.
He told MPs: “Last Tuesday evening, April 14, I found out for the first time that on January 29 2025, before Peter Mandelson took up his position as ambassador, that Foreign Office officials granted him developed vetting clearance, against the specific recommendation of the United Kingdom Security Vetting, that developed vetting clearance should be denied.
“Not only that, the Foreign Office officials who made that decision did not pass this information to me, to the Foreign Secretary, to her predecessor, the Deputy Prime Minister, to any other minister, or even to the former cabinet secretary Sir Chris Wormald.
Read More:
- Gillian Mackay eyes key government role in strongest hint of fresh SNP-Green deal yet
- All jobs at risk as Scottish business edges towards closure after 52 years
- Protesters target Donald Trump's Scottish golf course with wind power protest
“I found this staggering, and therefore last Tuesday I immediately instructed officials in Downing Street and the Cabinet Office to urgently establish the facts, on my authority.
“I wanted to know who made the decision, on what basis, who knew, and Mr Speaker, I wanted that information for the precise and explicit purpose of updating this House, because this is information I should have had a long time ago, and it is information that the House should have had a long time ago.
“It is information that I and the House had the right to know.”
He went on to state: “Let me be very clear the recommendation in the Peter Mandelson case could and should have been shared with me before he took up his post.
“Let me make a second point, if I had known before he took up his post, the UKSV (UK Security Vetting) recommendation was that developed vetting clearance should be denied. I would not have gone ahead with the appointment.”
The Prime Minister told MPs he could not accept that Foreign Office officials could not have informed him of the security recommendations.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has accused the Prime Minister of breaching the ministerial code by waiting nearly a week to come to the Commons with information about Lord Peter Mandelson failing his security vetting.
Mrs Badenoch said: “His reputation is at stake. Everyone is watching. It is finally time for the truth.”
Arguing that Sir Keir Starmer inadvertently misled the House, she said: “I will remind him that, under the ministerial code, he has a duty to correct the record at the earliest opportunity.
“The Prime Minister says he only found out on Tuesday that Peter Mandelson failed the security vetting. The earliest opportunity to correct the record was Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, almost a week ago. This is a breach of the ministerial code.”
Mrs Badenoch said: “We know that the Prime Minister announced the appointment before vetting was complete, an extraordinary and unprecedented step for the role of US ambassador.
“The Prime Minister says that it was usual for this because it was a political appointment.
“So I will remind him and the rest of the Labour front bench who were heckling that Peter Mandelson was a politician who had been sacked twice from government for lying. That meant he should have gone through the full security process.”
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar doubled down on his calls for the Prime Minister to quit, telling the STUC conference in Dundee that a vote for Sir Keir was not an endorsement of his party.
"I know that people have frustrations and disappointments, and I share them,” he told delegates.
“There are many good things, but also too many mistakes.
“So, let me be clear, a vote for Scottish Labour in this election is not an endorsement of Keir Starmer."
Share