PM won't face inquiry over claims he misled MPs on Mandelson vetting

The UK House of Commons voted against launching a parliamentary inquiry into claims that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer misled MPs regarding the vetting process for Lord Peter Mandelson’s appointment as the UK’s ambassador to the United States. The motion, tabled by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, was defeated by 335 votes to 223. The vote followed accusations that Starmer had falsely assured Parliament that the appointment underwent full due process and that no undue pressure was applied to Foreign Office officials. Despite calls from some Labour MPs on the party’s left wing for Starmer to refer himself to the Privileges Committee, the majority of Labour MPs opposed the inquiry after a coordinated effort by No 10 to secure party discipline. The Ministerial Code requires ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament to resign, while inadvertent errors must be corrected promptly. Badenoch criticized Labour MPs for dismissing the motion as a political stunt, while some Labour rebels argued the government’s opposition to the inquiry risked appearing as a cover-up. Fourteen Labour MPs defied the party whip by supporting the motion, with one MP formally abstaining. Other parties including the Liberal Democrats, SNP, Greens, DUP, Plaid Cymru, Reform, and several independents also voted in favor of the inquiry. Over 50 Labour MPs did not participate in the vote, either due to official absences or government business. The controversy has intensified scrutiny of the Mandelson appointment, with former senior advisers admitting mistakes in the process. Labour MP Emma Lewell-Gibbon, one of the rebels, criticized the government’s handling of the vote as disconnected from public sentiment and suggested Starmer should have proactively referred himself to the committee to clear his name. Rebecca Long-Bailey, another Labour MP, indicated that the issue could have political repercussions for Starmer following the upcoming local elections. The episode highlights ongoing tensions within Labour and raises questions about transparency and accountability in ministerial appointments.