Starmer survives another busy day – UK parliament votes against inquiry over Mandelson

The UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer faced down the efforts by the opposition parties to force him to face a Parliamentary inquiry with a 112 vote majority

The Labour Party whips managed to muster a respectable majority of 335 MPs against 223 MPs from the opposition ranks. Only fifteen Labour MPs rebelled against the whip and backed Kemi Badenoch’s motion. 92 MPs did not vote on the motion. Nigel Farage was among those absent from the vote. A party spokesman explained he was ‘on the campaign trail’.

A number of Labour members were critical of the government for whipping its MPs to oppose the motion, some suggested that the prime minister should have referred himself to the Privileges Committee to “clear his name” and to draw a line under questions about the way he went about appointing Mandelson as ambassador to the United States. Others questioned why they had been instructed to oppose the motion saying the party could be accused of operating a “cover-up”.

Moving the motion the Conservative Party leader, Kemi Badenoch, characterised the debate as being about “whether parliament matters more than party — whether Members believe in transparency, accountability, and the rules that underpin our democracy”. She argued that with their vote MPs would indicate “whether they support proper scrutiny and uphold the standards they promised their constituents, or they can choose party over principle.” Those voting as instructed by the Labour whips would “rue the day” they voted against referring the prime minister to the Privileges Committee and accused the Prime Minister of threatening his MPs that they would lose their jobs unless they joined the efforts to cover up the misleading statements that he had made to Parliament.

Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats accused Starmer of ‘ducking’ scrutiny by forcing Labour MPs to defend him which he described as a cowardly way to govern. Davey concluded that if Starmer really believed that his conduct in relation to Mandelson was “up to scratch,” he should have undergone investigation by the Privileges Committee. A substantial number of Lib Dem MPs did not vote.

The Greens, Scottish National Party, Democratic Unionist Party, Plaid Cymru, Reform and nine independent MPs voted with the Tories in favour of the motion.

Earlier in the day the Commons Select Committee heard evidence from Keir Starmer’s former Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney and from Philip Barton, the former Permanent Under Secretary in the Foreign Office.

McSweeney confirmed that he had advised the Prime Minister to appoint Mandelson as U.S. ambassador. He accepted that appointing Mandelson was a was a serious error of judgment and accepted that the advice he had given the Prime Minister was wrong. When asked who was the first person to propose Mandelson he suggested that it was Mandelson himself.

McSweeney said that he had concerns about what was known at the time about Mandelson’s contacts with Jeffrey Epstein, that he had put his concerns to Mandelson but he could not share the emails with the Committee as they were now part of police investigations. The Bloomberg revelations in September 2025 which brought about Mandelson’s sacking he suggested were like “a knife through my soul” , that what had emerged about Mandelson was ‘way, way, way worse than I had expected”.

McSweeney told the Committee that he did not know Mandelson had failed security vetting.

Sir Philip Barton told the Committee that he had not been consulted, that he was informed on 15 December that the PM had chosen Mandelson to fill the most important and sensitive of all ambassadorships, and that was the first he knew of it. When asked whether “due process” had been followed, Barton said it was not normal for the appointment to be announced before completing security vetting. He had not been aware that Mandelson had failed security vetting. He understood that a ‘due diligence ‘ on Mandelson had been conducted and the “Prime Minister was satisfied”.

He said the there was pressure from ‘Number 10’ to confirm Mandelson’s appointment that arose from the wish to have Mandelson in the post before President Trumps inauguration in January 2025. Time was so short there was ‘no time for dialogue.’

Barton told the Committee he was aware of Mandelson’s contacts with Epstein and that it ‘could become a problem politically ‘down the line’. He also made the point that there was a ‘lack of curiosity about Mandelson’ and that Number 10 was “uninterested” in his vetting.

While overall Sir Philip’s evidence was not the disaster for Keir Starmer it was not helpful.

One other interesting development that has somewhat gone under the radar: the UK’s Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament, the Committee which is made up of members drawn from both Houses of Parliament and which has statutory responsibility for the oversight of the UK Intelligence Community also issued a report on Tuesday indicating that it had reviewed documents arising from the ‘Humble Address’ tabled by the Conservative Party aimed at forcing disclosure of papers, emails and vetting documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment. The Committee has decided that where redactions in documents to be released are requested by the Government a Contested Redaction Hearing will be held following which “there will be no further process and Government must then publish the documents as decided by the Committee, a potentially important decision.

The defeat of the Conservative motion to refer Keir Starmer to the Committee that triggered the downfall of Boris Johnson was of course a welcome development for the British Prime Minister. The evidence presented to the Foreign Affairs Committee was not the disaster that it could have been. Keir Starmer will be relieved to put the day behind him. The Commons now goes into a recess for the Council elections which take place on 7 May – some called the ‘May Day Recess’. Mayday is of course the internationally recognised destress used by mariners and pilots: Keir Starmer will be hoping that the title of the break it is not a prophecy of another disaster.

Caption: A handout photo made available by The House of Commons shows Leader of the Conservative Party Kemi Badenoch (C) during a debate on a motion on Privilege in the Houses of Parliament in London, Britain, 28 April 2026. Members of Parliament are debating if British Prime Minister Keir Starmer misled the Parliament over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador. EPA/THE HOUSE OF COMMONS HANDOUT