Skip to content
Bramble

Politics

Government settles with sacked Foreign Office chief Olly Robbins before judicial review

The government has settled out of court with Olly Robbins, the Foreign Office head sacked by Keir Starmer over Peter Mandelson's vetting. The Guardian reports a believed six-figure payout.

3 outlets · 1L · 2C · 0R First reported Account updated
Image: Evening Standard
Image: The Guardian
Image: BBC News

1 / 3

The story, neutrally told

Mixed · 2The government has reached an out-of-court settlement with Olly Robbins, the senior civil servant who challenged his sacking by Keir Starmer over Peter Mandelson's security vetting. Centre · 1The FDA union, which represented Robbins, announced the settlement on Friday 16 October. Left · 1Robbins had been removed as the top civil servant at the Foreign Office in April and had applied to the high court for a judicial review of the prime minister's decision.

Left · 1According to the Guardian, he was removed after its disclosure that he had overturned a recommendation from UK Security Vetting (UKSV) to deny clearance for Mandelson. Centre · 1Robbins said he was grateful for the support of former colleagues, friends and strangers, thanked the FDA for its help in reaching the settlement, and said he was looking forward to moving on to the next chapter of his life. Left · 1The Guardian reports the payout is believed to be six figures, though not as large as the record £860,000 given to former cabinet secretary Chris Wormald; it says the government will ultimately have to publish the sum.

Left · 1FDA general secretary Dave Penman said the affair had damaged the bond of trust between civil servants and ministers, described the sacking as the scapegoating of Robbins to mask the previous prime minister's misjudgment, and urged the government to clarify ministerial involvement in vetting. Left · 1At the time, Downing Street said Robbins had lost the confidence of Starmer and then foreign secretary Yvette Cooper over his handling of the vetting. Left · 1Robbins's legal submission argued Starmer had no statutory authority to dismiss him, that there was 'no fair procedure', and that the reasons given were 'irrational'; the Commons foreign affairs committee has said his dismissal seems to have been taken without full due process.

Left · 1The Guardian adds that questions remain over Robbins's defence of his actions and over how the national security establishment vets people.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left1 outlet

Framing
Detailed Guardian report led by the six-figure payout, with background on the vetting row and support for Robbins within Whitehall.
Emphasis
Payout size, FDA criticism, committee finding of inadequate due process, unanswered vetting questions.
Leaves out or plays down
Does not carry a government response to the settlement.
Charged language
“scapegoating”
For example
“Six-figure payout for senior civil servant sacked over Peter Mandelson vetting” — The Guardian

Centre2 outlets

Framing
Brief report of the out-of-court settlement and Robbins's statement.
Emphasis
The settlement announcement by the FDA and Robbins's thanks.
Leaves out or plays down
No payout figure, FDA criticism or detail of the legal arguments.
For example
“The FDA union, which represented him in the challenge, announced on Friday that the Government had chosen to settle out of court.” — Evening Standard

Right0 outlets

No right outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Ask about this story

Loading…