Former British spy ‘surprised and disappointed’ at Theresa May snub over Russia dossier

Published

4 years ago

October 22, 2021

admin

A former British spy who wrote a dossier on Donald Trump said he once spent hours with then home secretary Theresa May, briefing her on the Russia threat.

Christopher Steele also revealed he had been asked by a UK official to review sensitive government documents on Russia just days before his dossier, which alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow in the 2016 US election, became public.

It meant he was left feeling “surprised and disappointed”, he said, when Mrs May, as prime minister, then appeared to play down his links to the government.

“It was quite galling to have announcements made… to the effect that this was nothing, we were nothing to do with the government, we hadn’t worked with or for the government for years and so on,” the former senior MI6 officer said in an exclusive Sky News interview.

He was referring to remarks by Mrs May in January 2017 after the dosser ignited a political firestorm in the United States, drawing furious denials from then president-elect Trump.

“It is absolutely clear that the individual who produced this dossier has not worked for the UK government for years,” she said at the time.

Yet Mr Steele said staff from Whitehall’s Joint Intelligence Committee had been sitting in his office about 10 days before news of the dossier broke because of the unrelated request for him to review “highly sensitive government papers on Russia”.

He also said that Mrs May would have known who he was because he had met her with his business partner, Christopher Burrows, another former intelligence officer, at the house of a mutual friend back in 2010 when she had just become home secretary.

The friend had suggested, “that we should get together and talk about some of these issues so that she got off to a good start and understood the sort of playbook and MO (modus operandi) of some of these Russian actors,” Mr Steele said.

As for what they discussed, Mr Steele said: “There wasn’t really a lot of evidence of electoral meddling as such in 2010. But what we did say is that when you look at Russia, you can’t just take organised crime, oligarchs, government separately. You have to see them as a sort of plasma cloud that is linked in together and they are all operating with each other and for each other. And it’s a diffuse threat.”

In late 2016, before it became public, Mr Steele said he shared his work, investigating possible links between the Kremlin and Mr Trump, with senior British officials out of concern about what his sources were claiming.

He said he thought security officials had handled it correctly but he was not so sure about government ministers, noting how the focus had understandably been on delivering Brexit and adjusting to the unpredictability of an incoming Trump presidency.

“The overall impression I had was that this was a problem they didn’t want to face up to,” he said.

A spokesperson for former prime minister Mrs May did not respond to a request for a comment.

Lord Mark Sedwill, who was her national security adviser, pushed back on Mr Steele’s assertion.

“Just because people outside government can’t necessarily see action, particularly when it relates to matters of intelligence and security, they shouldn’t assume that the action isn’t happening and it isn’t being dealt with seriously,” he said in an interview.

“Now, of course, the British government, as both Theresa May and Boris Johnson have said, has to have a good relationship with the president of the United States, whoever that is.

“But because he didn’t see action at the time that he was hoping to see does not mean it wasn’t taken seriously and any allegation of that kind is, of course, investigated properly and professionally.”

Politics

Twenty warnings for Sir Keir Starmer from new deputy leader Lucy Powell

Published

2 hours ago

October 25, 2025

admin

Twenty warnings for Sir Keir Starmer from new deputy leader Lucy Powell

Labour’s new deputy leader Lucy Powell promised to be Sir Keir Starmer’s ally.

Yet in her victory speech she criticised his government and its record no fewer than 20 times. And told him to raise his game, or else.

Politics live: Follow for updates as Labour names new deputy leader

Here’s what she said – and what she meant:

“Division and hate are on the rise. Discontent and disillusionment widespread.” What she meant: The Labour government has been a huge disappointment.
“The desire for change is impatient and palpable.” What she meant: You’ve had 16 months to deliver change – voters are saying, “Get on with it”.
“We have to offer hope, to offer the big change the country’s crying out for.” What she meant: Stop tinkering. Get more radical. You’ve got a huge Commons majority, after all.
“We must give a stronger sense of purpose, whose side we’re on and of our Labour values and beliefs.” What she meant: We’re not doing enough for working people or tackling inequality.
“People feel that this government is not being bold enough in delivering the kind of change we promised.” What she meant: Our voters are deserting us because they don’t see change.
“I’ll be a champion for all Labour values and boldness in everything we do.” What she meant: Watch out! I’m going to hound you and hold your feet to the fire!
“We won’t win by trying to out-Reform Reform, but by building a broad progressive consensus.” What she meant: Stop the lurch to the Right on immigration. We’re better than that.
“It starts with wrestling back the political megaphone and setting the agenda more strongly.” What she meant: We need to sharpen up our communication and selling our message.
“We’ve let Farage and his ilk run away with it.” What she meant: The Reform UK leader is running rings round us in communicating and campaigning. We’re too sluggish and flat-footed.
“For too long the country and the economy has worked in the interests of the few and not the many.” What she meant: Winter fuel payment cuts were a disaster and the two-child benefit cap has to go.
“Trickle down economics hasn’t worked.” What she meant: No more tax cuts for the rich. It’s time for a wealth tax, for example, to redistribute wealth.
“Life has just got harder and harder, less and less secure in work, in housing, in making ends meet.” What she meant: We’re failing to tackle the cost of living crisis and housing shortages.
“The deep-seated inequalities that have widened in wealth in regions in class in health need fundamentally redressing.” What she meant: We’re failing to look after our “red wall” voters.
“Re-unite our voter coalition and re-unite the country.” What she meant: Start governing for everyone, urban and rural, rich and poor, North and South. Stop neglecting poorer regions.
“We need to step up.” What she meant: For goodness sake, sort out the chaos in 10 Downing. Stop blaming aides and civil servants and sacking them. Get a grip!
Members and affiliates “don’t feel part of the conversation or party of the movement right now. And we have to change that.” What she meant: Stop ignoring and alienating activists, MPs and unions.
“Unity and loyalty comes from collective purpose, not from command and control.” What she meant: Stop the control freakery in parliament and party management. It’ll backfire.
“Debating, listening and hearing is not dissent. It’s all strength.” What she meant: Listen to your backbenchers and stop suspending them when they vote against policies like welfare cuts.
“As your deputy, my commitment is to change the culture.” What she meant: I’m going to stand up for rebels and critics and force you to ditch the control freakery and bad decisions.
“At the election 16 months ago the British people voted for change. I’m here to do everything I can to make that change a reality.” What she meant: Raise your game, or else!

She said it all with a smile, but there was menace there.

As deputy leader, Lucy Powell was always going to be a critical friend. So there you go, prime minister. Here’s 20 things you need to do for her to be more friend than critic.