Ambassadors: Vetting Process

Lord Wallace of Saltaire Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I think what I said—I hope it is what I said; if it is not, I will clarify it—was that it was an announcement. The changes announced yesterday by the Cabinet Office were around making sure that that does not happen in future. Although it does not affect the vetting in substance, clearly it creates a perception and there is a risk there. We wanted to remove that, so we have announced that already. When there are further changes, which almost inevitably will arise as a result of the reviews that are being undertaken, there will be subsequent changes as well.

[Lord Wallace of Saltaire (LD)]

Can I press the Minister on what she said about being in favour of public appointments having parliamentary scrutiny? We on these Benches strongly support that. It sounds a very welcome thing, not necessarily for all our ambassadors but certainly for all senior public appointments. After all, we are supposed to be a parliamentary sovereignty and the idea that these are entirely in the hands of the Prime Minister clashes with the myth, at least, of parliamentary sovereignty. Can she explain a little more about whether this is now government policy?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

Government policy as regards the narrow issue that the noble Lord raised has not changed. That is not to say it cannot or will not ever change as a consequence of the considerations being made now. It is possible for the Foreign Affairs Committee to summon an ambassador and to want to hear from them. That is available under existing arrangements. I take his comment that he feels that Parliament should have greater input and greater oversight of many of those things. I think that is a welcome suggestion.