Keir Starmer Faces Possible Sleaze Probe Over Mandelson Scandal

Keir Starmer is facing yet another bruising week over the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal.

Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee will continue its probe into the affair, with the prime minister’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, giving evidence on Tuesday.

But it is the possibility of Starmer being investigated by the cross-party Privileges Committee for misleading parliament which is causing most concern inside 10 Downing Street.

Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle is expected to announce on Monday afternoon if MPs will be given a vote tomorrow on whether the PM should be referred to the powerful committee.

Here, HuffPost UK explains the background to the latest controversy to hit Starmer and assesses the damage it could do to the beleaguered PM.

There are two strands to the accusations against the PM.

His critics say he misled the Commons by previously insisting that “due process” was followed when Mandelson was vetted for the role of UK ambassador to Washington.

It has subsequently emerged that UK Security Vetting had recommended the then Labour peer be denied clearance to take up the role.

However, the Foreign Office decided that the risks highlighted over his business links to Russia and China could be mitigated, and he was given the highest security clearance, known as “developed vetting”.

The second accusation centres around comments Starmer made at prime minister’s questions last week.

He said that “no pressure existed whatsoever” in getting the Foreign Office to give Mandelson security clearance.

But that had been contradicted the previous day by Sir Olly Robbins, who was sacked by Starmer for not telling him about UK Security Vetting’s concerns.

Giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee, Sir Olly said there was “constant pressure” on his department from No.10 and there was an “atmosphere of constant chasing”.

In a Sunday Times interview, the PM insisted there was no inconsistency between his comments and Sir Olly’s.

He said there was “different types of pressure” in government.

“There’s pressure – ’Can we get this done quickly?’ – which is not an unusual pressure. That is the everyday pressure of government,” he said.

Starmer said a pressure “essentially, to disregard the security vetting element and give clearance” would be something different, and that Sir Olly “was really clear in his mind that wasn’t pressure that was put on him”.

Even if Hoyle grants MPs a vote on referring the PM to the Privileges Committee, it would require a huge Labour rebellion for it to pass.

According to The Times, No.10 is planning to whip Labour MPs to vote against a probe, making it a major test of the under-fire prime minister’s authority.

One Labour MP told HuffPost UK the issue was a “complete waste of time” and insisted there was no comparison with the Privileges Committee investigation Boris Johnson faced over partygate.

He said: “Boris Johnson’s parties in breach of lockdown rules were of a wholly different magnitude of severity. Besides, the PM has been truthful about due process throughout.”

Emily Thornberry, the Labour MP who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, accused the Tories of playing political games ahead of the elections on May 7.

She said: “It may be that at some stage in the future some of the questions haven’t been answered and it is decided that they are of sufficient importance that the Privileges Committee should be involved but I don’t really see why we are doing it at the moment apart from potentially people trying to score points in advance of the local elections.

“I’m sorry to say that and I’m not supposed to be partisan on this but it is plain as the nose on my face what’s going on here.”

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.