Matthew Doyle, the former No 10 communications chief who got a peerage after he left Downing Street, has said that he “never sought” a post as an ambassdor and that he was “never aware of anyone speaking to the FCDO about such a role for me”.He was responding to the revelations at today’s committee hearing with Olly Robbins.I will post the full quotes when I get them.UPDATE: See 3.53pm for the full quote.

The sacked senior civil servant Oliver Robbins has said he was subject to “constant pressure” when he started working at the Foreign Office to get Peter Mandelson in post as soon as possible.Robbins was speaking to the Commons foreign affairs committee in a hearing which has revived claims that, despite Keir Starmer claiming that the Mandelson appointment was in part a vetting failure, in reality Starmer’s team were hell-bent on getting Mandelson to Washington despite the multiple concerns about the appointment.Robbins also revealed that at one point No 10 wanted him to find a diplomatic post for Matthew Doyle, who was Starmer’s communications director at the time.Privately, some Labour MPs have been expressing alarm about the latest revelations.The account of Mandelson’s vetting process given by Robbins has raised new questions about whether Robbins was misled about the findings of the agency responsible for vetting.

Electricity generators will face higher windfall taxes unless they sign up to long-term fixed-price contracts under UK government plans to protect bill payers from future gas market price shocks, as the Iran war pushes up energy prices, Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has told MPs.For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.On Radio 4’s PM programme Evan Davis, the presenter, said producers could not find a Labour MP willing to come on the programme to discuss the Mandelson affair.Here is John Crace’s sketch about Olly Robbins’ evidence to the foreign affairs committee this morning.And here is an extract.

double quotation markAt one point, [Robbins] insisted that the two books he knew by heart were the civil service manual and the Book of Common Prayer.Blessed are the geeks.For they shall inherit the Earth.Just a shame that Olly never got to the bit in the prayer book about anything to do with Peter Mandelson always ending in a vale of tears.A shadow of darkness.

And unlike previous misdemeanours, this time there shall be no resurrection for him.Possibly not even for Olly or Keir.Kemi Badenoch closed the debate.She thanked the Tory MPs who supported her.And she also praised some of the Labour MPs who spoke, saying that this is the first time she ever agreed with the leftwing MP Richard Burgon.

(In his speech, Burgon was particularly critical of the role played by Morgan McSweeney, and he said there should be an inquiry into the role played by Labour Together, the thinktank that McSweeney helped to set up,)Badenoch said there were still many unanswered questions,double quotation mark[Jones] could not answer why the prime minister put the Foreign Office under constant pressure to approve the appointment,He could not answer why No 10 were dismissive of the entire vetting process,He could not answer why No 10 also asked for the disgraced Matthew Doyle to be made an ambassador, and hid this from the foreign secretary, and he could not answer why the prime minister sacked Olly Robbins if he was following a process which he claims was there already.

Badenoch said she would try getting questions again at PMQs tomorrow.She ended:double quotation markThe prime minister has put the country’s national security at risk.He is not fit for office.He must take responsibility.It is time for him to go.

Jones said the claims made about the PM lying had been shown to be “not true in any way”,He said that a leak inquiry is underway into the source of the Guardian’s story published on Thursday last week,And he said a further release of information required by the humble address demanding the publication of paperwork relating to Mandelson’s appointment would be coming “shortly”,Jones said there was no law preventing ministers being told of UK Security Vetting recommendations,Jones defended the decision taken by Keir Starmer to sack Olly Robbins.

Esther McVey, a Conservative former cabinet minister, asked Jones to confirm that, if the decision to sack Robbins was proper, he would not get any payoff.Jones said he would not comment on any potential employment tribunal claim.Jones said in the debate today it was claimed the Cabinet Office suggested Mandelson did not need security vetting.(This did come up in the debate, but the claim was originally in the evidence given by Olly Robbins this morning.See 9.

26am.)Jones said it was the other way round.He said it was the Foreign Office that asked the Cabinet Office if Mandelson needed to vetting given that he was already a peer and privy counsellor.He said the vetting then took place.Jones said some MPs asked about the policy for material being redacted when the government publishes the Mandelson material required by the Commons humble address.

Jones said any redactions would be visible, because they would be indicated by black marking,And they would be agreed with the intelligence and security committee, he said,Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, intervened to ask if Jones thought Keir Starmer followed “due process” when taking the Mandelson decision,Jones said Starmer followed the process that was in place,Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, is winding up on behalf of the government at the end of the Mandleson debate.

He started by stressing that Keir Starmer has apologised for the Mandelson appointment.As Tom Clark points out in a Prospect article quoted earlier (see 2.22pm), there is a striking contrast between the way Keir Starmer treated Louise Haigh (who was sacked over a fraud conviction that dated from before she even became an MP) and Peter Mandelson (who was appointed ambassador to the US despite being sacked twice already from cabinet jobs).Haigh has given an interview to LBC’s Tonight with Andrew Marr.She said the latest Mandelson revelations showed “a very small clique at the heart of the Labour party and the heart of this government have been pushing decisions in their own self interest, not in the parties and certainly not in the countries”.

She said:double quotation markThere has been a very small clique, primarily of men with a fetish for the worst elements of New Labour, that have pushed interests in their own interest.And the revelations that we continue to see around Peter Mandelson and now around Matthew Doyle are evidence of that.Haigh seemed to be referring in particular to Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s former chief of staff.In the debate Ben Spencer (Con) said that Keir Starmer should not have needed security vetting to realise that, if the US administration had access to the Epstein files, that meant they had “compromising information” on Mandelson.He said that meant Mandelson would be entering critical negotiatons knowing that the administation had leverage over him.

“That, for me, is the most egregious fundamental failure in terms of protecting our national security,” he said.Sorcha Eastwood, the Alliance MP for Lagan Valley in Northern Ireland, said that the Mandelson affair showed how disconnected the Commons was from everyday life.She said that if one of her constituents overclaimed on benefit, they would have to pay it all back.Or if a disabled person parked in a disabled bay without showing their permit, they would “get hammered”.But Keir Starmer was able to get away with just saying appointing Mandelson was a mistake, she said.

She said MPs had to show they valued integrity.For the sake of his party, and the country, Starmer should resign, she said.In his speech in the debate this afternoon Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, said the Mandelson appointment was motivated by the need to please Donald Trump.(See 3.18pm.

) Stephen Bush, the Financial Times’ political commentator, disagrees.On Bluesky he says:double quotation markThe ‘Starmer appointed Mandelson because he needed someone to manage Trump’ - not true.What happened was:1) From the general election there was a desire in Downing Street for a political appointee2) There was no question that the US embassy had good Trumpworld links as it wasdouble quotation markIt was just the old story of appointing political allies to diplomatic posts - something which we learnt today some in Downing Street wanted to do to one of the sacked comms directors, too.double quotation markMandelson’s first major task when he arrived in Washington (which to be fair he did pull off) was having to soothe Trumpworld that a pro-EU, previous Trump critic and China dove had become ambassador.My colleague Jessica Elgot agrees.

double quotation markYes, this is one of the most pervasive myths of the whole business, that it was to appease Trump,Total bollocks,double quotation mark“Oh they needed an operator!” They literally had someone already there who the White House asked to keep in post and they put their mate in there instead,Emily Thornberry, the chair of the foreign affairs committee, has told LBC’s Tonight with Andrew Marr that she thought it was clear from Olly Robbins’ evidence today that Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff, was the person pushing for Peter Mandelson to get the ambassador post,She said:double quotation markThis is Morgan taking too much power to himself.

And the criticism of Kier is that he let him.Asked if the committee would be summoning McSweeney to give evidence, Thornberry replied:double quotation markI am going to invite some other witnesses.It would probably be best if they heard that first from me rather than from you.But on one point Thornberry was supportive of Starmer.She said Robbins was in a difficult position and she had “a great deal of sympathy for him”.

But she went on:double quotation markI still, though, don’t think it was wrong for him to lose his job,I’m afraid I don’t,