Keir Starmer plunged into new crisis as Olly Robbins challenges huge decision | Politics | News


Sir Olly Robbins has submitted a legal challenge over his dismissal as the top civil servant at the Foreign Office, a union representing the top former civil servant has said.

The FDA Union said Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer should โ€œadmit that sacking Olly was a mistake, based on a grievous misunderstanding of how the National Security Vetting (NSV) system worked and a rash response to a media storyโ€.

Sir Olly said: โ€œI bring this action reluctantly. It would have been unnecessary if the Prime Minister had simply apologised for his mistake and made amends for the distress and cost it has caused me and my family.

โ€œInstead, I now have to ask the courts to determine that the Prime Ministerโ€™s decisions were unlawful, unreasonable and to quash them.โ€

In April it emerged that Lord Peter Mandelsonโ€™s appointment had gone ahead even though he failed the normal security vetting leading to accusations the Prime Minister had misled Parliament.

A furious Sir Keir blamed the Foreign Office for failing to tell ministers, sacking its most senior civil servant Sir Olly โ€“ prompting claims that yet another official had been made to pay the price for his mistake.

Downing Street defended Sir Keir Starmerโ€™s decision to sack Sir Olly in April.

The Prime Ministerโ€™s spokesman told reporters: โ€œWhat this comes down to at its core is a fundamental judgment by individuals who held overall responsibility for this process not to communicate the outcome of the UKSV (United Kingdom security vetting) recommendation about Peter Mandelsonโ€™s security vetting.

โ€œAs I say, the Prime Ministerโ€™s view is that this is fundamentally important information that should have and could have been shared, including on multiple occasions since.

The official said he had made โ€œa serious error of judgmentโ€, adding: โ€œOlly Robbins has obviously had a distinguished career and is a man of integrity and professionalism, but the Prime Minister fundamentally disagrees with the sharing of the outcome of that security vetting, and that is why that decision was taken.โ€

Leave comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *.