Every parliamentary written question tabled by Mike Wood this session, with the full answer and department. See how every department answers, or back to the MP page.
Showing 221–240 of 1,727 · Cabinet Office
If he will publish the completed UKSV tick box vetting form relating to Lord Mandelson.
I refer the Hon Member to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March, the statement made by the Prime Minister on 20 April, and the Government’s response to the debate of 21 April, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address. The Government is working to ensure that Parliament’s instruction is met with the urgency and transparency that it deserves.
Whether Oliver Robbins was given (i) a formal or (ii) an informal steer from Downing Street (a) civil servants or (b) special advisers to take steps to facilitate Lord Mandelson’s appointment as Ambassador.
I refer you to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March, the statement made by the Prime Minister on 20 April, and the Government’s response to the debate of 21 April, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address. The Government is working to ensure that Parliament’s instruction is met with the urgency and transparency that it deserves.
Pursuant to the answer of 20 April 2026, to Question 124839, on 9 Downing Street: Repairs and Maintenance, whether the OCS invoice for the 9 Downing Street works in the published data for the month of November 2025 is the transaction of (a) Ref: 10000204, OCS Group UK Limited, Transaction HZ820722, £72,702.73, (b) Ref: 10000204, OCS Group UK Limited, Transaction HZ824136, £352,411.88, or (c) Ref: 10000204, OCS Group UK Limited, Transaction, HZ819861, £97,083.25.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Hon Member in the time available before Prorogation.
Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether Jonathan Powell was subject to security vetting (a) before or (b) after he was appointed as the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy on the Chagos negotiations.
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
What the evidential basis was for the response from Tim Allan to the media on 11 September 2025, that the security vetting of Lord Mandelson was done by the FCDO in the normal way; and whether Tim Allan corresponded with others in Downing Street on this response.
I refer the Hon Member to the Statement made by the Prime Minister on Security Vetting on the 20 April 2026, Official Report, Column 23-26
Whether he plans to (a) review and (b) update the Cabinet Office document, Guidance for the management of Private Office information and records, following Lord Mandelson’s appointment.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Hon Member in the time available before Prorogation.
Whether (a) the Prime Minister and (b) the Cabinet Office discussed with the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office whether Lord Mandelson, as a Privy Councillor, required UKSV security vetting.
I refer the Hon Member to the remarks given by the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister on 21 April 2026, Official Report, Column 232.
On what dates did (a) Cat Little, Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet Office, and (b) Antonia Romeo, Cabinet Secretary, find out that Lord Mandelson had failed UKSV clearance.
I refer you to the statement made by the Prime Minister on 20 April, and his answers to the questions raised in response, including his commitment that the Government would continue to comply with the instructions of Parliament in the Humble Address of 4 February.
Whether Lord Mandelson whilst Ambassador provided advice to the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's office on the composition of HM Government and Ministers of the Crown.
Decisions relating to the reshuffle on 5 September were taken by the Prime Minister.
Pursuant to the Answer of 20 April 2026 to Question 124834 on Intelligence and Security Committee: Press Releases, whether the uplift in resourcing to the Intelligence and Security Committee included resource to obtain legal advice on the Humble Address independent from (a) Cabinet Office legal advisers and (b) the Government Legal Service.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Hon Member in the time available before Prorogation.
Pursuant to the answer of 16 April 2026, to Question 122717, on Civil Service: Redundancy, whether the departures of (a) Sir Simon Case, (b) Sir Chris Wormald and (c) Sir Oliver Robbins fall under the classification of Mutually Agreed Exits, as set out in the Annex 6F document.
It is a longstanding policy not to comment on HR matters.I refer to my answer for PQ 88716. Details of any payments made to permanent secretaries are published in their relevant Department Annual Report and Accounts.
What the terms of reference are for the review into security concerns from Lord Mandelson having access to STRAP material; who will be undertaking that review; and whether it is the same review to the one being undertaken by Sir Adrian Fulford.
The Government Security Group (GSG) will conduct a review into Peter Mandelson’s conduct while in the role of HMA Washington. The review will seek to establish whether Mandelson’s actions constituted a national security risk during his tenure.GSG’s review will be conducted separately to that of the review being conducted by Sir Adrian Fulford; which will focus on learning from the Peter Mandelson National Security Vetting case and vetting decision making.
Whether any special adviser since July 2024 has had Developed Vetting approved with mitigations following a (a) borderline conclusion and (b) recommended refusal from UKSV.
National Security Vetting (NSV) clearance applications, including Developed Vetting, are rigorously assessed within a robust governance framework. UKSV works closely with departmental vetting risk owners to balance risk mitigation and operational demands with assured and effective national security safeguards. In line with the practice followed by successive administrations, the Government does not otherwise comment on security matters. To reveal such details could prejudice national security and would provide insights into the scale and nature of the UK’s sensitive workforce and the thresholds of our security safeguards.
What the revised terms of reference are for the review into security vetting led by Sir Adrian Fulford; who will he report to; and whether the review will be made public.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Hon Member in the time available before Prorogation
If he will place in the Library a copy of the report into the review of the vetting process led by Sir Chris Wormald.
This document has been deposited in the House Library.
Pursuant to the answer of 13 April 2026 to Question 124080 on Lord Mandelson, whether Darren Tierney offered to Downing Street that he could interview Lord Mandelson.
I refer the Hon Member to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March which sets out the process of appointment and the steps the Government is taking to strengthen the process going forwards.
What the reason was for the time taken for officials to inform the Prime Minister of FCDO information on Lord Mandelson’s failed security vetting during the Humble Address response; and whether there were discussions on the release of that information to the (a) ISC and (b) House of Commons.
I refer you to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March, the statement made by the Prime Minister on 20 April, and the Government’s response to the debate of 21 April, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address.
Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether Lord Mandelson’s STRAP clearance was a separate process to his Developed Vetting clearance; and whether it was subject to a separate (a) FCDO and (b) UKSV (i) review and (ii) recommendation.
I refer the Hon Member to the statement made by the Prime Minister on 21 April, and his answers to the questions raised in response, including his commitment that the Government would continue to comply with the instructions of Parliament in the Humble Address of 4 February.
Whether (a) Jonathan Powell, (b) Tim Allan, (c) Matthew Doyle and (d) Morgan McSweeney passed their security clearances without any qualification.
We do not comment on the details of individual clearances or national security as a matter of course.
Further to the answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent of 9 April 2026, to Question HL16074, on Prime Minister: USA, whether the Prime Minister was seated when viewing the presentation about Palantir’s work at the meeting in Washington, and whether Lord Mandelson was present with him at that time, and whether the Prime Minister asked questions about the work of Palantir further to the presentation.
The visit was part of the Prime Minister's trip to Washington. During this visit the Prime Minister listened to a short presentation about Palantir’s work, followed by a tour of the premises and an introduction to members of staff. Any contracts for any firm go through the usual rigorous departmental processes and their decision makers.