Speeches by Whittingdale.

“Can I ask about the two notes that went to the Prime Minister from the private office about the appointment? In each case—they have been released under the Humble Address process—they are completely blank, other than the submission. There is no comment. The Prime Minister has not indicated any view. I have worked in Do…”

“Well, that is the alternative: that he did not indicate in writing, but said, “I would like to have a meeting to discuss this.” But if such a meeting took place, there would be a record of it, and no record has been released.”

“You say the Prime Minister had been made aware of the risks, but he had not, because the developed vetting had not been carried out, so all that had taken place was the due diligence. Did you ask whether or not developed vetting had taken place?”

“Did you express a view as to whether or not developed vetting should take place before an announcement?”

“So how did you discover that the Prime Minister had decided to go ahead with Peter Mandelson?”

“Coming back to the answer you gave the Chair about you leaving your post, you said that David Lammy told you that he wanted to make a change because of the transformation programme. Do you believe that your concerns about the way in which Peter Mandelson was appointed had any influence on the decision to ask you to lea…”

“You will be aware that a number of very senior former civil servants have spoken about how damaging this episode has been for the civil service. As a former very experienced permanent secretary and head of the diplomatic service, what is your assessment of how this has affected the civil service, and in particular the …”

“But in your conversation with the Prime Minister about Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, was the subject of Mandelson’s staying in Epstein’s flat after the conviction part of the conversation?”

“One would assume, given the sensitivity of the material on this phone—maybe all sorts of things besides Peter Mandelson—that there would be quite a robust effort to recover it. Has there been any news as to whether it has been found?”

“When you were told that a decision had been reached and it was Peter Mandelson, did you express any concerns about that?”

“So until 15 December you had no information that any discussion had taken place, and certainly that a decision had been reached.”

“A meeting took place, which led to the private secretary writing to say that that was the decision. Is there a record of that meeting?”

“So the decision was that he required DV. That was your view and it was the view of the Foreign Office security department, yet we know that prior to him obtaining DV clearance, he was given access to information that would usually require DV to have been completed. How did that come about?”

“Can I just be clear? The Prime Minister had decided that he wished to make a political appointment. Was it you who first said, “Prime Minister, I have the perfect candidate: Peter Mandelson”?”

“And you missed the operator saying “Stepney Park”.”

“On 4 February, Parliament passed a motion requiring the divulgence of all communications relating to the appointment of Peter Mandelson. On 25 March, you reported that your telephone had been stolen. The Metropolitan police have released the transcript of the call you made relating to the theft of your mobile phone. Yo…”

“Sorry.”

“On Belgrave Road.”

“Can we take it that your phone would have contained quite a lot of communications, either with Peter Mandelson or about Peter Mandelson’s appointment?”

“But you advised the Prime Minister of that.”