“I’m Terrified!” | New Starmer’s Mandelson Text Leak Sparks Public Outrage

Sir Richard Deer, former head of MI6. Uh

Sir Richard, it is always an honor to

have you on the program. Let's start off

with the Mandlesson thing. I don't think

the prime minister's stupid. I think he

probably knew exactly what was going on

when he appointed Mandlesson as a fatal

complement

before any of the vetting has happened.

Do you think that I'm sort of being a

little bit too harsh on him and I should

sort of swallow his lines that it was

just poor judgment?

No, you aren't being too harsh. Look,

there's a very simple fact is that you

don't put someone in a post which

requires a DB certificate who can't get

one. So, you know, just go back to

basics. There are no ifs and buts and

gray lines when it comes to the upper

echelons and compartments of national

security. Um, and Mlesson couldn't

[clears throat]

surprise surprise make the standard. So

he just shouldn't and uh Oliver Robbins

should have just said I refuse to um

agree the appointment and put the onus

on the prime minister or Lammy to

overrule him. Uh I mean I've just

written an article about this which

you've probably read.

>> Um don't over complicate it. I mean,

right from the word go, it was

absolutely obvious anybody who knew

anything about Madison's background,

despite the fact he was sort of new

labor fixer, he wouldn't get a DV

certificate.

>> Yeah. He wouldn't get a job in a local

library, quite frankly. Which just

brings me right back to the question of

why why this why Mandlesome? Why did he

why did the prime minister expend so

much political capital and risk on this

appointment? Um, I mean, this is what

something in me is sort of is sort of

nagging at me that one of the things

they wanted him in before inauguration

and one of the big ticket items that he

was going to be responsible for was

convincing Donald Trump that giving the

Chaos Islands to Maitius was a necessity

and the deal was a very good one. And

it's it's this it's this sort of

judgment on China especially that just

keeps coming coming up over and over

again with this government. And then you

look at the reasons perhaps why deal may

have failed vetting and uh moreover from

it being Epstein one imagines it's

actually down to some of his former

clients including members of the Chinese

Communist Party.

Well, if there's a basic problem, I

think it's the confusion over

international law. And we have a

government that seems to be in the grip

of international lawyers who, as it

were, interpretation is highly

subjective and many of us disagree with

the line they take. And I mean Herma's

behavior in relation to that bent

solicitor Sha

um is just outrageous. And I think if

you look at Herma's record, many of us

would feel that he's unsuitable to hold

public office because of his record and

you know what he's doing now in relation

to Northern Ireland and this Northern

Ireland bill uh and his sort of

persecution of British soldiers who've

been involved in a really complex and

difficult conflict. It's I mean I think

most of us feel it's completely

unacceptable. But you you star is you

know in a hole and he's still digging

hard and I you know he doesn't seems to

be incapable of really drawing a line

under these issues and I mean the

government is going to suffer dreadfully

in forthcoming elections

>> and they deserve to because from where

I'm standing politically appointing a

man who's not elected to the highest

legal office in the land which one

imagines he's read into a lot of highly

classified information. Um, when you

look at his previous client list, I I'm

terrified by that. I'm assuming that

because it's a sort of ministerial

appointment, he he doesn't have to

undergo the sort of vetting that a civil

service appointment would require or or

or has he had to, Lord Herma?

>> Well, I'm not sure of the procedure, but

I think, you know, he's a he's appointed

to the position as he's a lawyer, and I

I don't know what the vetting rules are.

I would have to look it up. I'm I I'm

not going to sort of put my [laughter]

opinions out on that particular issue,

but I I think just as record but then

you know we've got an administration

that clearly believes very heavily in

aspects of international law and being

applied across the board which some of

us feel very very uncomfortable with and

I I think this is completely wrong and

you know they'll suffer politically so

why the hell are they doing it? I often

wonder whether our own prime minister

would pass vetting quite frankly given

his own history of enjoying gap years in

Soviet workers camps and the like. And

you know Mandlesson as well, he was a

member of the Communist Party for a

period of time. And I kind of think to

myself, so Richard, how is it that we

spent most of last century helping

America fight communism, terrified of

it, and then the turn of the century

fighting Islamism and terrorism, and now

we actually have people with, you know,

deeply strong connections to communist

regimes and extreme left-wingers and

people who are, you know, the pro Gars a

lot are sitting on the green benches.

>> Well, the justification that they see is

they were elected. And the trouble is

that, you know, you can't vet the prime

minister.

He

>> Do you think he'd pass it if he was

vetted?

>> Well, he probably would in his case. You

know,

some of Well, there are quite a few

leftwing politicians who've got some

pretty peculiar skeletons in their

cupboard. I mean, the one that I really

stood out against and went public on was

Jeremy Corbyn. um you know before that

uh uh election in which in the end he

did so badly and I got lambasted by

various labor figures for doing so but I

mean Corbyn could never ever have got

anywhere near having a DV certificate.

I'm not going to make the same comment

about Star. I think in Islam's problem

is is political judgment and you know

doing successively stupid things. Um you

know which well which is amazing that

you know we we've got we we have a

deficit of good judgment in our prime

minister and actually some previous ones

as well and we need to put that right.

>> Does it concern you the proximity of

this current government with China?

Because when I sort of toted up the

amount of ministerial visits that have

taken place since they took power and

then you look at other things, Chaos

Islands, the mega embassy, Ed Milliban

buying everything that they ever make

when it comes to net zero and and and

green infrastructure. Um it's a well

it's a huge change, a huge turnaround

from where I thought we were at as a

country. Again, we've had a a government

that when they were asked, well, you

know, do you want to help give evidence

to prosecute some Chinese spies by

saying China poses a threat to national

security? They wouldn't do it. So, are

we supposed to be happy with China now

that they're no problem, nothing to see

here, or should we be deeply concerned

that this government seems to be cozying

up to Xi Jinping? Well, we should be

deeply concerned and you know, we we're

going to have a trading relationship

with China, whatever. But we need to do

that with our eyes wide open and I'm

pleased to say, you know, I've been

invited several times into the House of

Commons to brief groups of Labor MPs who

want to understand better the security

problem of our relationship with China.

So, it's not as though, you know, the

whole of the Labor Party is in the wrong