Mandelson files will be published even if embarrassing to No 10, says ISC chair

"Lord Beamish, who leads parliament's intelligence and security committee (ISC), said there had to be maximum transparency about the vetting process Mandelson went through before he was appointed ambassador to the US in December 2024 and what the government knew about his friendship with Epstein. The ISC, which has statutory responsibility for oversight of the UK's intelligence services will assess whether documents should not be released because they compromise national security, rather than jeopardising international relations, the Labour peer told BBC Radio 4's The World Tonight."

"Beamish said it was possible the committee could publish documents that impacted international relations. In the past, for example, we've had disputes where things have potentially been embarrassing to governments, but we've put them in because it doesn't jeopardise national security, he said."

"On Wednesday Downing Street had attempted to mitigate the Conservatives' attempt to trigger the release of the documents by adding exemptions for national security and to protect international relations. But MPs called the move a cover-up and demanded that judgment on their release be taken by the intelligence and security committee rather than the cabinet secretary."

The intelligence and security committee (ISC) will investigate the vetting process surrounding Peter Mandelson's December 2024 appointment as ambassador to the US and examine what the government knew about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. The ISC has statutory responsibility for oversight of the UK's intelligence services and will judge whether documents risk national security rather than simply harming international relations. The committee chair indicated a willingness to publish material that may embarrass the government if it does not jeopardise security. Downing Street added exemptions for national security and international relations, prompting MPs to accuse ministers of a cover-up and demand ISC judgment.

Read at www.theguardian.com