Hello and welcome to Coffeehouse Shots, the Spectator's Daily Politics Podcast. I'm Oskredenson. I'm joined

today by Tim Shipman and Gabriel Pogrant. Now, Gabriel, we're especially excited to have you on because you are in

possession of a scoop, which appears in the paperback version of your very good book, Get In, which you co-authored

with Patrick McGuire. Could you tell us about how thin this vetting process appears to be on

Peter Mandelson as US ambassador?

Well, what are great questions that animated asked approaching the paperback was, will

the same personality traits and possibly defects that characterised Starmes' time in opposition

translating to the government. And if so, what will that look like? You know, we characterise

Stama as somebody whose politics are often conspicuous by their absence at his first

leadership campaign meeting in 2019. He didn't want to chair the discussion and when asked what

he did wish to discuss, raised important points with adhering to campaign finance and trade union

legislation. So this is one of those moments, the appointment in Mandelson, where you see that

lack of politics made flesh in government and in, forgive theé, the corridors of power, because one of the

details in our book, which assumes some significance now is that Starma did not actually

speak to Mandelson prior to his appointment in any way. There was no meaningful discussion,

not only on the topic of why he wanted the job, whether he wanted the job,

but also what Stama himself wanted from Mandelson.

It was wholly outsourced to the man we are sometimes pilloried for describing inadvertently

on almost three dozen occasions as the Irishman.

It was Mitzweeney who was given the brief, given the authority to ramrod the

appointment through, despite this, as you say, thin vetting process, which even biased thinness

did throw up some pretty obvious issues. But I have at risk of ending up in a rant been

...