British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has survived a bid by opposition politicians to subject him to a parliamentary probe over his controversial appointment of Peter Mandelson as envoy to the US.
Members of parliament voted against referring Mr Starmer to a committee to consider if he misled parliament over giving Mr Mandelson, an ex-associate of late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the plum diplomatic post.
It was the latest development in an unrelenting scandal that has plagued Mr Starmer’s Labour government for months, hampering its work and leading to calls for him to resign.
After a debate lasting more than five hours, 335 MPs voted against launching an investigation compared to 223 for, a majority of 112 in the 650-seat parliament.
The probe would have been held by the cross-party privileges committee, which investigates potential breaches of parliamentary conduct.Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch, who led the move for the probe, said it was “very obvious” that what Mr Starmer had told the House of Commons regarding Mr Mandelson’s 2024 appointment was “not correct”.
“It’s clear that full due process was not followed,” she told MPs.
Mr Starmer denies allegations that his office applied pressure on the foreign ministry to approve Mr Mandelson’s appointment as Britain’s ambassador in Washington despite having failed security vetting.
Earlier this month, Mr Starmer sacked the most senior civil servant in the foreign office, Olly Robbins, for not telling him or other ministers that Mandelson had not passed the checks.
Starmer, who branded the probe motion “a political stunt” ahead of local elections in England, Scotland and Wales next week, commands a large majority in the lower house of parliament.Labour MPs were ordered to vote against the motion, meaning it was always unlikely to pass.
Several Labour MPs dissented however, highlighting their discontent with the prime minister.
Brian Leishman, a frequent Labour rebel, said Mr Starmer should have referred himself to the committee and was voting for the motion.
MP Emma Lewell said the government’s instruction to vote against “played into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide”.
Mr Starmer sacked Mr Mandelson in September 2025 after a fresh batch of revelations came to light about the extent of the latter’s friendship with Epstein, who died in prison in 2019.
But the row has only escalated since, with Mr Starmer’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and ex-communications head Tim Allan forced to step down earlier this year.
Mr Starmer’s cause has not been helped by the fact that UK police are investigating Mandelson over allegations he committed misconduct in office while serving as a Labour minister more than a decade ago.
Mr Mandelson is accused of leaking sensitive information to Epstein. He denies wrongdoing.
Advising Starmer to appoint Mandelson ‘wrong’ – McSweeney
Morgan McSweeney blamed Mr Mandelson for not telling the full truth about his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during his appointment as Ambassador to the US.
Mr McSweeney told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee that if Mandelson had told the truth he would not have come close to being appointed.
Mr McSweeney told MPs that he accepted responsibility for advising the prime minster to appoint Mr Mandelson to the UK’s most important diplomatic post.
Translate This Article
