Welcome to Sunday morning with Trevor Phillips.

The Prime Minister claims that no one told him that his choice for ambassador to the United

State had failed to get a clean bill of health from the security services.

But it's not at all clear why that would have made an iota of difference to his decision.

First, he chose Mandelson himself in the teeth of opposition from his foreign secretary,

from his national security adviser, and from many in his cabinet. And he then defended that

decision month after month.

He did so in full knowledge that his choice did business in Russia and China,

had paled up with a convicted paedophile,

and then stayed in the man's home while he had been in jail.

It's hard to imagine what more could possibly have emerged from the vetting process that would have changed his mind.

Second, he could have chosen to ask more questions about the background of his candidate for the single most important diplomatic role this country has to offer.

After all, as a barrister, forensic questioning is supposed to be his core skill. I was appointed to public

office three times by two different prime ministers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. My roles didn't

carry a tenth of the importance or sensitivity of the job in Washington. But both Blair and

Brown took the trouble to speak to me personally.

What they weren't sure about, they asked me to explain. I suspect both probably knew more about me

than my own mother. Kier Starrma, by contrast, reportedly never spoke to Mandelson ahead of the

appointment, never asked him face-to-face about his links with Epstein,

and by his own admission, never asked his advisers what the security services had discovered.

You can lay a fair bet that Robbins will get both barrels tomorrow from the Prime Minister.

But if you're the boss, blaming the hired help won't work.

...