Highlights:
- MPs to vote on whether Keir Starmer should face a parliamentary inquiry
- Debate centres on claims Starmer misled parliament over Mandelson’s appointment
- Government dismisses move as a “desperate political stunt”
- Labour majority could block any inquiry from proceeding
LAWMAKERS in the UK will vote on Tuesday on whether prime minister Keir Starmer should face a parliamentary probe in the House of Commons over the appointment of Peter Mandelson.
Members of parliament will debate whether to refer Starmer to the Committee of Privileges to consider if he misled parliament over the appointment of Mandelson, a former associate of the late convicted US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The vote, expected later today, follows a decision by House of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle, who said he had approved requests from “numerous” lawmakers, including opposition Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch. He added that allowing the debate should not be taken as an indication that Starmer had done anything wrong.
ALSO READ: Three weeks, three months, or three years? The uncertain future of Starmer
The development is the latest in a continuing issue that has led to calls for Starmer to resign.
Claims over appointment process
Badenoch has accused Starmer of misleading lawmakers by insisting “due process” was followed ahead of Mandelson’s 2024 appointment as Britain’s ambassador to the United States, despite him having failed security vetting. The focus of any inquiry is expected to be on Starmer’s statement that due process was followed.
Starmer has rejected the move. Speaking to Sky News late on Monday, he said it was “a stunt” and added, “We’ve got huge amounts of transparency going on already.”
A spokesperson for his office also described the push for a vote as a “desperate political stunt” ahead of local elections due on May 7.
Starmer has sacked the most senior civil servant in the foreign ministry for not informing him or other ministers that Mandelson had not passed the checks. He has also denied claims that his office pressured the foreign ministry to approve the appointment.
Government publishes letter
The government on Monday published a letter sent in September by former cabinet secretary Chris Wormald stating that he had concluded “that appropriate processes were followed in both the appointment and withdrawal” of Mandelson as ambassador.
Mandelson was dismissed in September 2025 after further details emerged about his relationship with Epstein. UK police are investigating allegations that he committed misconduct in public office while serving as a Labour minister more than a decade ago by leaking information to the financier.
The case has raised questions about Starmer’s decision to appoint Mandelson. It also followed reports that a security vetting body had described the appointment as a borderline case and was leaning against granting clearance, a decision later overruled by foreign ministry officials without informing the prime minister.
Labour majority may decide outcome
Starmer’s Labour Party holds a large majority in parliament, meaning many of his own MPs would have to support an inquiry for it to proceed. The government could also instruct its lawmakers to vote against launching the probe.
If MPs vote in favour, the Committee of Privileges, made up of lawmakers from the three largest parties, would examine whether Starmer knowingly or inadvertently misled the House of Commons. Any finding that he knowingly misled parliament could have serious implications for his position.
The committee previously investigated former prime minister Boris Johnson over statements made about gatherings during Covid-19 restrictions. Johnson resigned as an MP in 2023 before the committee published its report recommending his suspension.
(With inputs from agencies)
