MPs vote against investigation into whether Starmer misled parliament

MPs have rejected an investigation into whether the prime minister misled parliament in his characterisation of Peter Mandelson's appointment as Washington Ambassador.

In a vote on Tuesday afternoon, MPs opposed referring the PM to the Commons Privileges Committee, after Labour backbenchers came together under a party whip to reject it.

The final numbers stood at 223 to and 335 against referring Starmer to the committee, a majority of 112.

Following the vote, Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch said Labour MPs will “rue the day” they voted against referring Sir Keir Starmer to the Privileges Committee.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said some MPs had complained they were heckled with shouts of 'shame' as they voted, and urged those responsible to apologise.

Despite the victory, a handful of backbenchers broke ranks on Tuesday to criticise the government for whipping its MPs to oppose the motion, and suggested the prime minister should refer himself to the Privileges Committee to “clear his name”.

Fifteen Labour MPs rebelled against the whip and backed Kemi Badenoch’s motion, along with Hull MP Karl Turner, who recently lost the Labour whip over his opposition to plans to limit jury trials.

Sir Keir himself attended the Commons on Tuesday evening to vote against the motion.

After the vote, a Downing Street spokesman said the government was “delivering for Britain” while the Conservatives had “resorted to this desperate political stunt” ahead of local elections “because they have no answers on the cost of living or the NHS”.

Kemi Badenoch said it was a "disgrace that 333 Labour MPs chose to be complicit in that cover up", following the outcome of the vote.

"To save his own skin, Keir Starmer threatened his MPs with the loss of their jobs unless they helped cover up his misleading statements to Parliament," she said.

“It is very notable that the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister would not repeat his boss’s claim that there 'was no pressure whatsoever' from No 10 on the appointment of Peter Mandelson.

“This is a government coming apart at the seams. They are more interested in their own survival than the cost of living crisis affecting hardworking families."

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey accused the prime minister of cowardice saying: “Starmer has ducked the scrutiny he should have faced by forcing Labour MPs to defend him. What a cowardly way to govern.“If he truly felt his conduct over the Mandelson scandal was up to scratch he should have undergone investigation by the Privileges Committee."

When former prime minister Boris Johnson faced a similar vote on misleading parliament over lockdown parties in Downing Street during the Covid pandemic, anger from his own backbenches led him to waive the vote through unopposed by his own MPs.

This investigation would later find he had misled parliament and recommend a ten-week suspension from the House as an MP.

Johnson resigned before a vote could be taken on whether to implement this sanction.

Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.

Earlier on Tuesday, two ex-officials gave evidence on Mandelson's appointment and security vetting to MPs on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

The claims Starmer stood accused of misleading MPs over were addressed by both the former permanent under secretary in the Foreign Office, Sir Philip Barton, and Starmer's ex-chief of staff Morgan McSweeney.

McSweeney denied he had exerted pressure on the Foreign Office to approve Mandelson's security clearance "at any cost", and Barton's testimony supported this, drawing a distinction between pressure to complete the process and pressure to reach a certain decision.

On the latter, Barton denied that had been the case.

On the issue of whether "due process" had been followed, Barton did, however, say it was not normal for the appointment to be announced before completing security vetting, as had been advised by the then cabinet secretary Simon Case.

Parliament will break later this week ahead of May's local elections.

The results of the vote on Tuesday came as parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) said it had finished reviewing the government’s proposed redactions to documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment ahead of publication.MPs ordered the government to publish a huge tranche of documents connected to the appointment in February, but so far only a handful have been released.The government has asked to redact some of the documents requested for national security reasons, or because they relate to a police investigation into allegations against Lord Mandelson of misconduct in public office, which the peer denies.In a statement on Tuesday, ISC chairman Lord Beamish said his committee had reached decisions on all the proposed redactions, including some requested within the previous 24 hours.The government could still challenge those decisions at a private committee hearing, which would take place after the state opening of Parliament next month.

Parliament will break later this week ahead of May's local elections.

From Westminster to Washington DC - our political experts are across all the latest key talking points. Listen to the latest episode below...