BREAKING: Keir Starmer sees off bid to set off Commons sleaze inquiry into Mandelson scandal

Prime Minister Keir Starmer ordered Labour MPs to oppose a Tory motion to refer him to the powerful Privileges Committee, which he’d branded political stunt

View 4 Images

Keir Starmer has faced down a bid to refer him to a parliamentary sleaze inquiry over the Peter Mandelson scandal in a day of Commons drama.

MPs voted down the Tory motion to refer the Prime Minister to the powerful Privileges Committee by 335 votes to 223 – majority 112. The Prime Minister had ordered Labour MPs to oppose the motion, which he branded political stunt. A handful of backbenchers were expected to rebel but a Downing Street operation to thwart a damaging defeat appeared to have paid off.

Ahead of the vote, Cabinet Minister Darren Jones accused Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch of “ranting incoherence”, and branded the move a “politically motivated spectacle”. He told MPs: “Rather than focus on the issues that affect our constituents and the country most, what to the opposition benches do?

“They try to shift the goalposts and have tried again and again to make their arguments fit. Today alone we have heard them bounce from one accusation to another in a desperate search for something that will stick.”

READ MORE: 16 key points from Morgan McSweeney’s Mandelson grilling from phone theft to betrayalREAD MORE: Keir Starmer says next election will be Labour v Reform with defining question ‘what is it to be British?’

Earlier, the Tory leader accused the PM of “whipping to avoid scrutiny”, as she opened the debate. “They are being whipped today to exonerate him before the facts have even been tested. It is not for the first time I am having to tell Labour MPs that they are being stitched up,” she added.

Labour MP Emma Lewell said she felt “let down, disappointed and I am angry” over the scandal, and criticised the Government for whipping the MPs to vote. She said: “I feel the way that today’s vote has been handled by the Government smacks, once again, of being out of touch and disconnected from the public mood.

“The fact that MPs like me are being whipped into voting against this motion is, in my view, wrong. It has played into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide and good, decent colleagues will be accused of being complicit in a cover-up.”

The clash came after Mr Starmer’s former right-hand man Morgan McSweeney said he made a “serious error” in advising the PM to send Lord Mandelson to Washington.

He said he never ordered officials to skip steps in the shamed peer’s vetting – but admitted No10 wanted the appointment made “at pace”.

During a grilling with the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr McSweeney said the revelations about Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein were “like a knife through my soul”.

He admitted he should have asked the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team (PET) to seek clarification with Mandelson rather than doing so himself, given their own relationship.

Earlier, former Foreign Office chief Sir Phillip Barton said Mr Starmer knew the risks that could arise from Lord Mandelson’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, who was a “toxic, hot potato” topic in the US. He said he was not consulted on the appointment despite his own concerns about the peer’s links to Epstein.

“There was no space, avenue or mechanism for me to put that on the table, a decision had been taken” he said. He said he thought it was “odd and insufficient” that the Cabinet Office initially did not think Mandelson needed the highest security clearance because he was already a peer.

Sir Phillip rubbished claims that the PM’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney had told him to “just f***ing approve” the appointment. But he echoed his successor Sir Olly Robbins, saying Downing Street was “uninterested” in the peer’s vetting, and officials were under intense pressure to get Lord Mandelson to Washington.

He told the committee: “It would have been a crisis if we got to the point where he had no vetting clearance.”

In a fresh headache for the Government, a leaked recording emerged of Britain’s new ambassador to the US criticising the special relationship. Christian Turner suggested the only special relationship America has is with Israel – not the UK – in remarks from February that dropped in the middle of the King’s US state visit.

Mr Turner also described the saga over Lord Mandelson’s appointment as a crisis that “has nearly brought down the government and ended the Prime Minister’s tenure”, according to the Financial Times.

He said he disliked the phrase “special relationship” to describe UK-US ties, saying it was “quite nostalgic, it’s quite backwards-looking, and it has a lot of baggage about it”. He added: “I think there is probably one country that has a special relationship with the United States — and that is probably Israel.” But according to the recording he added of the UK-US bond: “There is a deep history and affinity between us. Particularly on defence and security, we are intertwined.”

The remarks have been made public with US-UK relations already at rock bottom over the Iran war fallout and at a particularly sensitive time with King Charles on the second day of historic state visit to America.

The Foreign Office said the “private, informal” comments were made in early February at an event with UK students visiting Washington DC and “are certainly not any reflection of the UK Government’s position.”