UK PM Starmer avoids parliamentary probe over Mandelson appointment as US envoy
Starmer denies allegations that his office applied pressure on the foreign ministry to approve Mandelson's appointment as Britain's ambassador in Washington despite having failed security vetting.
Embattled UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer survived a bid by opposition politicians on Tuesday to subject him to a parliamentary probe over his controversial appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US.
Members of parliament voted against referring Starmer to a committee to consider if he misled parliament over giving 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 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 lawmakers 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.
Opposition Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch who led the move for the probe, said it was "very obvious" that what Starmer had told the House of Commons regarding Mandelson's 2024 appointment was "not correct."
"It's clear that full due process was not followed," she told MPs.
Starmer denies allegations that his office applied pressure on the foreign ministry to approve Mandelson's appointment as Britain's ambassador in Washington despite having failed security vetting.
Earlier this month, 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.
MPs from his ruling Labour party 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 Starmer should have referred himself to the committee and was voting for the motion.
Lawmaker Emma Lewell said the government's instruction to vote against "played into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide."
'Serious mistake'
Starmer sacked 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 Starmer's former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and ex-communications head Tim Allan forced to step down earlier this year.
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.
Mandelson is accused of leaking sensitive information to Epstein. He denies wrongdoing.
On Tuesday, McSweeney told parliament's foreign affairs committee that he made a "serious mistake" in advising Starmer to appoint Mandelson.
But he denied telling officials that Mandelson's vetting checks "should be cleared at all costs."
Earlier, Robbins' predecessor at the foreign office, Philip Barton, told MPs it was unusual for an appointment to be announced before the vetting process was completed.
The privileges committee was responsible for former prime minister Boris Johnson's exit from frontline politics after it investigated him for misleading parliament over the so-called "partygate" breaches of COVID-19 laws.
Johnson quit as an MP in 2023 before the committee published a report recommending his suspension.
