Speeches by Anderson.

“Who did you write the email to?”

“But have you had experience of people not passing due diligence? Is it a process that is a pass or fail then?”

“Just a bit more on the process: you were told about it in a phone call on 15 December, but you were not given the due diligence checklist, which we have in front of us—it is part of the Humble Address papers—that had already been completed. Did you see the conflict of interest paper at that time?”

“So they were the concerns that would have been raised by the due diligence form about the different things we can see here. Epstein, for example, was in that.”

“I appreciate your talking about the victims and survivors of Epstein at the beginning. I think I speak for the whole Committee in saying they are very much on our mind. Do you think the violence against women and girls aspect of this and the relationship with Epstein were downplayed during the conversations you had wit…”

“Okay. We are trying to get to the bottom of who really proposed Mandelson’s appointment. You have said you were sorry for your part in it, but also that, before you started in post after the election, there were some access talks. You referred to access talks in January 2024, which you were not party to, but which happ…”

“He said he would talk to No. 10 about that. Did you hear back from that before you then wrote that letter to say he was appointed?”

“In the process you have talked about, George Osborne and Peter Mandelson were the two names in play. How far did the process of George Osborne’s potential appointment, which then did not lead on, go? Did he have due diligence assessment made of him?”

“Is there any record of that meeting where you established that the Foreign Secretary was happy with that?”

“So it was a situation that needed to be resolved during that week. Do you think that the process of that week—the due diligence part of this and the timing of it—is evidence of pressure, of undue pressure, or of due process being followed?”

“I have one more question—one more piece of the puzzle—going back to access talks that you held before the election with people who were then shadow Ministers. Did the issue of political appointments, including the appointment of the ambassador to the US or appointing Peter Mandelson, come up in access talks, and would …”

“Finally from me, about the documentation of this process, decisions of this magnitude should not be done informally on the sofa. At previous Committee sessions, Members have become aware of a lack of some papers. Today, it has been referred to that the Prime Minister received a lot of views, and we do not have any pape…”

“No—let’s make this very clear.”

“Is there a precedent of you seeing a due diligence form or for asking—I know this is an unusual appointment, because the Cabinet Office did the due diligence, so you didn’t see it. Could you have asked for the FCDO to also do due diligence, seeing that you were going to be Peter Mandelson’s line manager and you were di…”

“By your own admission it was a very unusual political appointment. The whole process tested the system to the limit. We are looking at how the system worked in this case but also at what we need to learn for the future. You were told quite late on in the process. Due diligence had been done, then you were told that he …”

“With the benefit of hindsight and many months to look at this and to think about the whole process, where did the process go wrong? Was it at the early stage of even considering him, was it the due diligence, or was it the vetting?”

“At the two dinners and lunches that you attended, did Peter Mandelson lobby you about becoming the ambassador to the US?”

“Thank you very much, Sir Philip, for coming to give us evidence today. I have some questions about the due diligence part of the process. Were there any other FCDO appointments like this, where you were told about the due diligence, and it was an FCDO appointment, after the due diligence had been done?”

“That was the due diligence report that is now in the Humble Address papers that we have all seen. Is that the report you are talking about?”

“So you were told by a phone call, then you were in the same meeting together and then you said, “I’ve been told that this is going to happen,” and the Foreign Secretary said that he would have words with No. 10 after that. Then did you hear anything back from that?”