Commons Rejects Inquiry Into Starmer Over Mandelson Appointment

The House of Commons voted down a Conservative-led motion seeking an investigation into whether Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer misled MPs about the vetting process for Lord Peter Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador. The vote, held on Tuesday, saw 335 MPs against the motion and 223 in favor.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch had tabled the motion, arguing that Sir Keir misled Parliament by claiming 'full due process' was followed in Mandelson's appointment. She urged Labour MPs to support an inquiry, stating that rules must be upheld. Downing Street denied these accusations, asserting that appropriate processes were followed.

According to multiple reports, Starmer's former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney admitted advising the prime minister to appoint Mandelson was a 'serious mistake.' He told MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee that he initially believed Mandelson's experience would help secure a US trade deal but later realized Mandelson had not been truthful about his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. McSweeney denied pressuring officials to expedite the vetting process, although he acknowledged there was pressure from Downing Street to complete it quickly.

The Foreign Office's former top civil servant, Sir Philip Barton, testified that he had reservations about Mandelson's appointment due to his links with Epstein but felt no space for dialogue. According to BBC and Sky News, Barton described the attitude from No 10 as 'uninterested' in the vetting process, although he denied it was dismissive. He also revealed that there was pressure to complete the vetting quickly, given the prime minister's decision to appoint Mandelson and the timeline for Donald Trump's inauguration.

Labour MPs were whipped to vote against referring Starmer to the Privileges Committee. Senior Labour figures, including Gordon Brown and former cabinet ministers Alan Johnson and David Blunkett, dismissed the motion as a 'political stunt' designed to destabilize the government before crucial local elections. Meanwhile, some Labour backbenchers believe Starmer should refer himself to avoid allegations of a cover-up.

During Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, Badenoch accused Starmer of having 'squandered his political capital' and presiding over 'one disaster after another.' Starmer defended his record, highlighting Labour's achievements such as rights at work, security for renters, and lifting half a million children out of poverty. He also criticized the Conservatives for playing 'political games' with the inquiry motion.

The vote came amid growing tensions within the Labour Party, with reports suggesting that up to 50 Labour MPs may have broken a three-line whip on opposing the motion. Starmer's position is seen as weakened, and there are questions about whether he will take disciplinary action against the rebels. The issue is expected to resurface during the final Prime Minister's Questions before Parliament prorogues ahead of the King's Speech on May 13.