Olly Robbins learned he was losing his job as Britain’s most senior Foreign Office civil servant by a letter delivered on a Monday morning, several days after Prime Minister Keir Starmer had already forced him out.
The dismissal came not for poor performance but for failing to inform Starmer that Peter Mandelson, his nominee for ambassador to Washington, had not cleared UK security vetting—a fact Robbins had allegedly mitigated through unofficial channels to get the appointment through.
Whitehall is now split between those who see Robbins as a scapegoat for carrying out No 10’s wishes and those who believe Starmer was genuinely blindsided by a vetting process his own office had pressured officials to rush through.
The fallout has deepened a rift between the prime minister and the civil service, already strained by the earlier sacking of cabinet secretary Chris Wormald and Starmer’s public accusation that too many officials are complacent in managed decline.
Starmer’s office applied constant pressure to clear Mandelson despite vetting concerns
A senior civil servant testified that Starmer’s team exerted sustained pressure on bureaucrats to grant Mandelson the security clearance needed for the Washington ambassadorship, even as doubts lingered about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
This pressure came months after Starmer announced Mandelson’s appointment and before the formal vetting in January 2025 that ultimately flagged concerns, according to testimony cited in The Washington Post.
The civil servant’s account contradicts Starmer’s later claim that he was unaware of any issues until after Mandelson’s arrest in February, when Metropolitan Police examined emails showing Mandelson had shared confidential, market-sensitive information with Epstein.
Mandelson, a longtime Labour figure and former EU commissioner, has denied knowledge of or complicity in Epstein’s crimes but remains under investigation; his bail conditions have since been lifted.
Civil service anger over Robbins’ sacking reflects broader distrust in No 10
Supporters of Olly Robbins within Whitehall called his dismissal “total self-serving, narrow, selfish, political-endgame stuff,” arguing he was punished for doing exactly what No 10 wanted: moving Mandelson through vetting swiftly and installing workarounds for security objections.
Senior civil servants believe Robbins was made a scapegoat after Starmer, facing political fallout, blamed the Foreign Office for not alerting him to the failed vetting—a decision the prime minister called “staggering.”
The episode marks a new low in No 10’s relationship with the civil service, following Wormald’s ouster and eroding any residual goodwill from Labour’s return to power after 14 years of Conservative rule.
One mid-ranking official captured the chilling effect: “Why will we do anything vaguely risky that ministers want if we think they won’t have our backs if it goes wrong?”
Trump weighs in with tepid support as MPs call for Starmer’s resignation
Despite recently criticizing Starmer over Iran policy, former US President Donald Trump entered the fray, writing that Starmer “exercised wrong judgement” in appointing Mandelson but adding, “Plenty of time to recover, however!”
Trump’s comment came alongside a photograph showing him and Vice President JD Vance with Mandelson in the Oval Office in May 2025, underscoring the former ambassador’s once-close ties to Washington elites.
Some British MPs are demanding Starmer resign over the scandal, which resurfaced in February after Mandelson’s arrest and has repeatedly drawn scrutiny over what the prime minister knew and when.
Starmer has apologized to Epstein’s victims and the British public, maintaining he was unaware of Mandelson’s full ties to the financier when he made the appointment.
Why did Olly Robbins not tell Keir Starmer about Mandelson’s failed vetting?
According to supporters within Whitehall, Robbins believed he was following No 10’s wishes by advancing Mandelson’s appointment through unofficial mitigations after formal vetting raised concerns, and did not see himself as withholding information.
What evidence exists that Starmer’s office pressured officials on Mandelson’s clearance?
A senior civil servant testified that Starmer’s team applied “constant pressure” on bureaucrats to grant Mandelson the security clearance needed for the Washington ambassadorship, as reported in The Washington Post.
