Keir Starmer DODGES investigation over appointment of Lord Mandelson after forcing own MPs to block probe

Review of available Lord Mandelson files complete, confirms ISC

Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has announced completion of the review of files relating to the appointment of Lord Mandelson.

The committee, made up of peers and MPs, has been tasked with assessing all documents deemed potentially prejudicial to national security or international relations.

The government is being forced to publish all documents to do with the Labour peer’s appointment – bar those deemed harmful to the UK – as part of the humble address brought by the Conservatives.

Announcing the completion of their work, the committee said it had gone through “all documents which the government has referred to it” including those only submitted by close of play yesterday.

However, it added that “there are documents which the government has not yet referred to the committee because they are subject to the ongoing investigation by the Metropolitan Police”.

“The committee has prioritised work in relation to the humble address, with members setting aside all other business to read the documents such that the committee could meet and collectively review them at pace.”

Government is now able to contest documents that the committee deem can be published.

King Charles addresses Congress during State Visit 

King Charles is currently Addressing Congress as part of a diplomatic State Visit – the first of its kind since the late Queen visited in May 2007.

He has called for unity between the two nations amid strained diplomatic relations.

Reform UK figureheads abstain from parliamentary vote – ‘doomed to fail’

Nigel Farage and Robert Jenrick visited a petrol station | PA

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and Treasury spokesman Robert Jenrick abstained from this evening’s parliamentary inquiry vote on the grounds it was “doomed to fail”.

In their absence, six Reform MPs did vote in favour of the motion.

A Reform spokesman said: “Nigel and Robert are on the campaign trail speaking to real people.

“They doing the only thing that can actually get Starmer out of office – inflict a crushing defeat on the Labour Party.

“This vote was sadly never going to pass today due to Labour’s three-line whip.”

Fate of Labour rebels hangs in the balance as parliamentary punishment could ensue

A cabinet minister has refused to say if the 15 Labour MPs who voted in favour of a parliamentary inquiry into Sir Keir Starmer will lose the whip.

This would mean they would no longer sit as Labour MPs, but rather as independents.

It is sometimes used as a form of parliamentary punishment for ill discipline, most recently with MP Karl Turner, who had been a vocal critic of the Government’s justice reforms.

Asked about the rebels, Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens teold Sky News: “I think if you look at the list of my colleagues who voted with the opposition, there aren’t any names on that list that would surprise you or surprise me.

“To be perfectly honest, it’s regrettable that they did, but it’s not a surprise.”

She emphasied the decision to expel members remains with the chief whip.

Kemi Badenoch says ‘disgraceful’ Labour MP’s will ‘rue the day’ they followed Keir Starmer

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

The Conservative leader said: “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. It is a disgrace that 333 Labour MPs chose to be complicit in that cover up.

“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 No10 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.

“Labour MPs will rue the day that they voted against this motion, because it is the day that people saw they believe there’s one rule for Labour and another for everyone else.”

‘Major cracks open up in the Labour Party’ says Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

The Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has said the vote in the House of Commons was the biggest rebellion of Keir Starmer’s premiership so far.

Speaking on GB News, Alex Burghart said: “The Prime Minister has misled Parliament and he needs to be held to account. That’s why the Conservatives are doing our absolute best to make sure that he takes responsibility for the lies he’s told.

“We have been leading on this. And no surprise that when it came down to it, the Labour whips turned all the thumbs crews to try and get their people in.

“But this was the biggest rebellion of Keir Starmer as premiership, and we are seeing major cracks open up in the Labour Party tonight. And that’s what good opposition is.

“Everybody cares about the fact that this Prime Minister is letting the country down. Everybody wants a Prime Minister who tells the truth and actually delivers on things.

“Everybody knows Keir Starmer is not doing that. That’s why we’ve got to do the work that we’re doing to make sure that he’s held to account in the House of Commons. That’s what we’re doing, that’s what we’re going to carry on doing.

“We’re expecting a whole load of new documents after the local elections. Labour’s held them back until after the local elections. We will go through them with a fine tooth comb, and we will hold the Prime Minister to account when we get back.

“There’s one load of documents going to the ISC, and another load of documents that will come to the House of Commons direct. We’re looking forward to those.”

Second Labour MP unable to vote says she would’ve been 17th party rebel

Following comments from Jonathan Brash MP, a second Labour colleague who missed today’s parliamentary vote has also spoken out.

Bellavia Janet Ribeiro-Addy, MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill, wrote on X: “I am not in Parliament for today’s vote on referring Keir Starmer.

“If I was, I would be voting for the motion.

“Transparency is a cornerstone of our democracy.

“The best thing for the PM to do would be to simply refer himself on this matter and save us all the drama.”

Labour MP who called for Keir Starmer to ‘go’ issues statement

Jonathan Brash said the Government should have the final say on deporting foreign criminals | GB NEWS

Jonathan Brash, MP for Hartlepool, has issued a statement after he abstained from the parliamentary vote against an inquiry into Keir Starmer’s conduct.

He said he was unable to be in Westminster for the vote due to a commitment to attend the annual Worker’s Memorial Event in his constituency.

He claimed whipping parliamentary colleagues is a “serious misjudgment and deeply unfair on them”.

He said: “Regardless of the motives of opposition parties, the sensible course would have been for the Prime Minister to refer himself to the Privileges Committee.

“I would have voted for the motion today.”

Listed: The 15 Labour MPs who broke ranks and voted in favour of the inquiry

Apsana Begum – Poplar and Limehouse

Richard Burgon – Leeds East

Ian Bryne – Liverpool West Derby

Mary Kelly Foy – City of Durham

Imran Hussain – Bradford East

Brian Leishman – Alloa and Grangemouth

Emma Lewell – South Shields

Rebecca Long Bailey – Salford

Andy McDonald – Middlesborough and Thornaby East

John McDonnell – Hayes and Harlington

Graham Morris – Easington

Luke Myer – Middlesborough South and East Cleveland

Kate Osbourne – Jarrow and Gateshead East

Cat Smith – Lancaster and Wyre

Nadia Whittome – Nottingham East

15 Labour MPs break ranks and defy party whip to vote against PM inquiry

More than a dozen Labour MPs voted against the party whip, supporting a parliamentary inquiry into Sir Keir Starmer.

In total, 15 Labour MPs went against the whip and voted for a Tory-led effort to subject the PM to an investigation by the Privileges Committee.

Lib Dem leader brands Keir Starmer ‘coward’ after whipping MPs to vote against inquiry

Ed Davey sought confirmation Britain’s ECHR status will be protected | PARLIAMENT

Sir Ed Davey accused the Prime Minister of cowardice after he ordered Labour MPs to vote against referring him to the Privileges Committee.

The Liberal Democrat leader said: “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.

“The Liberal Democrats will always stand up for decency and honesty in politics – unlike this Prime Minister.”

MPs vote against Prime Minister’s sleaze inquiry

MPs have voted against launching an investigation into whether Sir Keir Starmer misled Parliament over the appointment of Lord Peter Mandelson by 223 to 335 votes, with a majority 112.

MPs now voting on whether Keir Starmer should face parliamentary inquiry

MPs are currently voting on whether or not Sir Keir Starmer should face a parliamentary inquiry into allegations that he misled the House.

It follows the Conservatives submitting a motion calling for the PM to be referred to the Privileges Committee over his comments around the vetting of Lord Mandelson.

The results of the vote are expected in due course.

Labour has a significant majority of 165 MPs, whipped to vote against the motion – therefore expected to win the vote and reject the idea of a parliamentary inquiry.

Ministers to impose social media restrictions for young people regardless of consultation outcome

Peers have stood down over plans to curb social media for under-16s after the Government agreed to introduce restrictions.

The two chambers of the Houses of Parliament had been locked in a fight over the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, regarding the content under-16s are exposed to online.

Ministers announced they would impose social media restrictions for young people, regardless of the outcome of a consultation currently under way.

Pressure in the House of Lords had been led by Tory former education minister and academy chain founder Lord Nash, who accepted the Government’s “last-minute” concession.

Peers voted four times to press the Commons into accepting a ban.

Lord Nash told the upper chamber: “I thank the Government for their active engagement in the matter of social media, albeit rather last minute, and for making a binding commitment to impose some form of age or functionality restrictions for children under 16, and to be focused on addictive features, harmful, algorithmic-driven content and features such as stranger pairing that we know can be most damaging to children’s safety and privacy and we know have led to so much harm and a number of deaths.

“This is very welcome to the millions of parents, voters, teachers, health professionals, and others who have been asking for it, and it is exactly what my amendment would have achieved.”

Poll reveals three in five Britons believe Keir Starmer SHOULD face parliamentary inquiry

More than three in five Britons believe Sir Keir Starmer should face a parliamentary inquiry into whether he misled the House over his knowledge surrounding the appointment of Lord Mandelson, a new poll has found.

Research by YouGov found 61 per cent of Britons believe the Prime Minister should be investigated, in contrast with just one in five who believe he should not be.

The new polling, carried out today, also found almost half of Labour voters believe he should face an inquiry, while a little over a third think he should not.

Meanwhile, more than three quarters of Tory voters, almost nine in ten Reform voters, and six in ten Green voters think he should face an investigation.

It comes as Sir Keir has whipped party colleagues to vote against the inquiry, in the hopes it will not go ahead.

‘He completely ignored advice’ says Richard Tice of Prime Minister

Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice has urged all MPs to vote in favour of a parliamentary inquiry into the Prime Minister, saying they should “follow their conscience”.

A motion put forward by the Conservatives is currently being debated in the Commons, which says Sir Keir should be investigated by the Privileges Committee over his handling of the vetting of Peter Mandelson.

Mr Tice said it comes down to two words: “pressure” and “process”.

He told GB News: “He was given the advice, and he chose to completely ignore it.”

Crowning Starmer “the king of process”, he suggested that he failed to follow this in Lord Mandelson’s appointment, accusing Downing Street of making a decision before vetting was completed and questioning whether vetting would be needed at all.

Mr Tice also said evidence given to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee shows that pressure was put on officials to get Lord Mandelson in post.

Iranian ambassador to UK summoned over ‘unacceptable and inflammatory’ comments

The Iranian ambassador to the UK has been summoned by Middle East minister Hamish Falconer over the embassy’s “unacceptable and inflammatory comments” on social media, the Foreign Office said.

Seyed Ali Mousavi was called in over an online message reportedly recruiting expats to become martyrs.

A Government spokesman said: “The Minister made clear that these actions and comments were completely unacceptable, and that the Embassy must cease any form of communications that could be interpreted as encouraging violence in the UK or internationally.

“Iran’s brutal and repressive regime will continue to be called out by the UK Government for its malign activities on UK soil, its reckless attacks against our allies in the Gulf, and its violence against its own people.

The UK Government is clear that protecting national security remains our top priority, and we will take all measures necessary to protect the British people.”

UK’s ambassador to US says real special relationship with Washington is ‘probably Israel’

|

The UK’s ambassador to the US has suggested the special relationship between the two nations no longer exists, and that the only one that exists between the White House and another country is “probably Israel”.

In leaked comments made to a group of sixth formers in February, Sir Christian Turner also said it is “extraordinary” that the fall-out from Lord Mandelson and others connected with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein “hasn’t touched anybody” in the US.

In the leaked remarks, the ambassador also appeared to suggest Sir Keir’s future looked “quite touch and go” in February, and that Labour MPs may “remove him” in May.

A spokesman for the Foreign Office said: “These were private, informal comments made to a group of UK sixth-form students visiting the US in early February.

“They are certainly not any reflection of the UK Government’s position.”

Social media restriction plans for under-16s expected by summer

The Government intends to put forward its proposals to restrict social media for under-16s by the summer – with plans to legislate before the end of the year, the Technology Secretary has said.

Liz Kendall said“it’s not a question of whether we act, but how” when it comes to controlling the content under-16s are exposed to online, and the length of time they spend staring at screens.

It comes after the Government said late yesterday it will introduce “age or functionality restrictions” on social media for under-16s.

The consultation on access to social media for young people, which is still open, floats a range of measures such as age restrictions and curfews.

Labour MP refuses to be ‘complicit in cover up’ in scathing attack on party whips ahead of sleaze probe vote

A Labour MP has launched a furious tirade against her party whips for pushing her to vote against a sleaze probe into Sir Keir Starmer, accusing them of being “out of touch”.

Addressing the House of Commons during a debate on the vote, South Shields MP Emma Lewell hit out at the “sorry saga” of Lord Peter Mandelson’s appointment and declared she feels “let down” by the Prime Minister.

Expressing her outrage at Labour whips for telling MPs to go against an investigation into whether Sir Keir misled MPs, Ms Lewell told the House: “I have watched this whole sorry saga play out for weeks now. Like the public, I feel let down and disappointed. I am angry.”

WATCH THE FULL CLIP HERE.

Ed Davey likens Keir Starmer to Boris Johnson in Commons clash

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has likened Sir Keir Starmer’s response to tabled Parliamentary motions to that of Boris Johnson’s.

Sir Ed joked about his own stunt-filled campaign tactics, saying: “The Prime Minister called this motion a stunt, that is not why I put my name to it.

“But it’s funny though, because ‘stunt’ is exactly the same word Boris Johnson used about the motion the Prime Minister and I tabled four years ago, referring Boris Johnson to the privileges committee.”

He hit out at the Conservatives’ “sanctimony” on the issue, after now-Tory leader Kemi Badenoch had defended Mr Johnson at the time.

The Kingston and Surbiton MP continued: “I looked back at what I said back then, and I was struck that I can use exactly the same words today.

“With families facing the deepest fall in their living standards since 1950s, with the pain of energy bills and rising food prices compounded by the Government’s unfair tax rises.

“We know that our constituents are facing real hardship. It’s not just a cost-of-living crisis, it’s a cost-of-living emergency, at such a time the country needs a Government that will be focused on tackling that economic emergency. Crucially it needs a Government that it can trust.”

He went on to quote the former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner from the debate four years ago: “Honesty, integrity and the truth matter in our politics, today MPs across the House have the opportunity to defend those principles and to vote to support our democracy.”

Keir Starmer is running a ‘scorched earth policy’, claims Kemi Badenoch

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has accused Sir Keir Starmer of running a “scorched earth” policy.

Addressing MPs at the start of a debate on whether to refer the Prime Minister to the privilege committees, she said: “This cannot just be a debate about the Labour Party or a division between those who are on the inner circle and those who are on the outside.

“Again and again, we have seen the children of the chosen ones, people who had never been in Parliament before, getting all the best jobs.

“We now have the sacked chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, his wife (Imogen Walker) is a whip, telling people to vote for a cover-up. That is not right.

“Let me ask [Labour MPs] this, Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister has nothing to hide, why is he whipping? To avoid scrutiny. Why? Why is he whipping? They are being whipped today to exonerate him before the facts have even been tested.”

Kemi Badenoch says Keir Starmer has led MPs ‘up so many hills’

After just under two and a half hours, the grilling of Morgan McSweeney by the Foreign Affairs Committee has finished.

We’ll head back to the Commons where Kemi Badenoch has accused Sir Keir Starmer of leading MPs from across the House “up so many hills and down again, U-turn after U-turn.”

The Conservative leader said: “This is a Government that does not know what it is doing and I think it’s very valiant of them to come out to defend the Prime Minister.

“This is despite the fact that he took the whip away from MPs who wanted to lift the two-child benefit cap and then he did it anyway.

“The member for Hayes and Harlington [former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell] had the whip removed for opposing the two-child benefit cap, then the Prime Minister U-turned.”

Labour MP Mr McDonnell laughed and said “true” from his seat.

Senior Tory MP probes Morgan McSweeney’s response to having his phone stolen

A long-serving Conservative MP has grilled Morgan McSweeney on his response to his Government-issued phone being stolen while in London.

Maldon MP John Whittingdale said: “The Met have released the transcript of your call. It shows you did not tell them that you were chief of staff to the PM and that this was a Government phone.

“If you had done that, they would have taken it more seriously.”

Mr McSweeney responded saying: “I was a victim of crime. Somebody hopped on to the pavement and took my phone from me. The first thing I did was to try and retrieve it. I tried to chase [them], which was probably a mistake.

“The next thing I did was I phoned No10, and I would have done whatever they told me to do. Now, I thought at the time that they would be able to track the phone and that’s what would happen given what’s actually on that phone.

“I then called 999. If No10 had told me, ‘you need to tell the police’ tell the call handler what your job is. I would have done so.

“I didn’t in any part of my job go around saying, I’m a very serious and senior person. I also thought, wrongly again, a squad car might come by and I could explain a bit more if the squad car had come by.”

Morgan McSweeney says he will live with Lord Mandelson decision ‘for the rest of my life’

Morgan McSweeney said he would live with his judgment calls “for the rest of my life” but argued the system “shouldn’t be reliant on just one adviser giving a bad piece of advice”.

The former Downing Street Chief of Staff told the Foreign Affairs Committee: “I know what I did wrong. I know the judgment calls that I made that were wrong. I’ll live with them for rest of my life.

“But as a chief of staff, and if you’re a political adviser, you’re also relying on the information being presented to you.”

He added: “You don’t have the ability to investigate, to ask more questions, to look deeper and deeper and clearly it didn’t work.

“It shouldn’t be reliant on just one adviser giving a bad piece of advice, and then the whole thing goes wrong, and the state needs to be more robust and stronger on this.”

Dame Emily Thornberry criticises lack of paper trail over Lord Mandelson appointment

Back in the Foreign Affairs Committee, Dame Emily Thornberry has criticised Morgan McSweeney over the lack of a paper trail relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as US Ambassador.

The former Downing Street Chief of Staff said: “I think the Government is conducted in conversations as well as papers. The Prime Minister should be able to phone people up and say: what do you think about this?

“It’s right that decisions are recorded. It’s difficult for me to say what’s the appropriate level of recording is.”

At that point, Dame Emily interjected to say: “The decisions themselves weren’t recorded, that’s the point.”

Mr McSweeney responded: “They were recording decisions. I saw regular paperwork on a whole bunch of decisions.”

British public ‘already fed up’ with politicans, claims independent MP

An independent MP has said the British public are already “fed up” with politicians as he called on Sir Keir Starmer to face a public committee.

Birmingham Perry Barr MP Ayoub Khan said: “The British public are already fed up with politicians. We see that in General Election with the low turnout rate.

“What we have here is a prime example of why the British public has lost confidence. We are trying to shield and hide from the public the truth.”

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch agreed with Mr Khan, adding: “We have to show we do things properly here.”

Labour ‘digging deep’ for ministers to come to the Commons to defend party

Kemi Badenoch took aim at senior Labour ministers as she joked about the “low turnout” from party figures for the sleaze debate.

The Conservative leader said: “Look at the fact that there are so few Cabinet ministers sat on the front bench. They have had to dig deep to the bottom of the barrel for junior ministers.

“I would say very gently and kindly to Labour MPs that if they vote against this motion that Labour has lower standards than everyone else.”

Kemi Badenoch on her feet in the Commons for Downing Street sleaze debate

While the grilling of Morgan McSweeney is still going on, just down the hall in the Commons, Kemi Badenoch is leading a debate into a probe over sleaze in Downing Street.

Making a joke about the turnout from Labour MPs, the Conservative leader said: “There are more people here then there were last time.

“The Whips really have been working hard.”

Lord Mandelson’s start date was ‘not priority’ according to Morgan McSweeney

Morgan McSweeney said the start date of Peter Mandelson was “not my priority”.

The former Downing Street Chief of Staff said: “There was far more serious issues affecting the Government and the country in January 2025 than the start date of an ambassador.

“That wasn’t my priority at all, that wasn’t the issue that kept me awake at night, and if I was talking to officials at all, generally at that level, it wouldn’t have been about this issue”

Pressure in Government “comes from inside you” to “make the country better”, Mr McSweeney said, adding: “There is a real difference between asking people to act at pace and asking people to lower standards. And we never did that.

“We never asked people to skip steps at any part of the process. I don’t think I spoke to Olly Robbins about the appointment or the start date.

“I think I had a conversation at least one, maybe two with Philip Barton, but it was on a wider Zoom call, as he said. It wasn’t on a phone call. It was all about, ‘can we do this at pace?’ nor ‘can we do anything improper?’.”

Morgan McSweeney denies swearing at Philip Barton

Morgan McSweeney has strongly denied swearing at Sir Philip Barton as he downplayed reports of a heated exchange between the two.

It was previously reported Mr McSweeney called the Foreign Office while he was Chief of Staff and told them to “just f*****g approve” the Lord Mandelson appointment

He said: “I am grateful to Sir Philip Barton for what he said about this swearing rumour. It has caused me a great deal of stress over the last few months.

“It is very corrosive and damaging for people’s reputation.

“I did not phone him, that he’s no recollection of me swearing at him, and I have no recollection of swearing at him either. I denied it when I was repeatedly asked about it by journalists.”

Lord Mandelson should have been asked more questions, admits Morgan McSweeney

| PA

Morgan McSweeney admitted he should have asked more questions during the process of Lord Mandelson’s appointment.

The former Chief of Staff said he had not carried out “any further investigations” on seeing a due diligence report, and said the developed vetting process seemed “surprisingly inadequate”.

Mr McSweeney said: “Should I have asked further questions of the whole combined team? I think that’s fair, I think I should have.”

Morgan McSweeney suggests Lord Mandelson’s appointment was due to his work as EU Commissioner

Former Downing Street Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney said the reason he thought it was right to appoint Lord Peter Mandelson “was his experience as EU Commissioner.”

He continued: “What came out in September last year with Bloomberg emails, the pictures and later revelations from the Epstein files shows the nature of the relationship meant he was unfit for the job.”

David Lammy ‘would have flagged’ concerns about Lord Mandelson appointment

Former Foreign Secretary David Lammy “would have flagged” concerns about Lord Peter Mandelson’s appointment to Washington, claimed Morgan McSweeney.

The former Downing Street Chief of Staff said: “Like everybody else, he could see that there was cons and risks, and like everybody else, he would have said I had reservations to…he’d have discussed them iteratively with the Prime Minister.

“The Prime Minister would have taken the Foreign Secretary’s views very seriously.”

When asked if Mr Lammy ever openly said appointing Lord Mandelson was a “bad idea”, Mr McSweeney responded “Not to me.”

Lord Mandelson would ‘not have been appointed’ if he had failed his security vetting

Lord Peter Mandelson would not have been appointed as ambassador to Washington if he had failed his security vetting, Morgan McSweeney said.

“I didn’t have a contingency plan in place, but was always aware that somebody could fail security vetting, was always aware that that was a possibility for any appointment that we made,” Sir Keir Starmer’s former aide told MPs.

Asked whether he actively thought the peer could not be granted clearance, Mr McSweeney said: “No. And if it had happened, we’d have withdrawn the ambassadorship. It would have been a political embarrassment.”

He suggested Downing Street would have gone on to ask Karen Pierce to stay on as ambassador until next steps would have been considered.

Morgan McSweeney says he ‘can’t comment’ on sacking of Olly Robbins 

Former Downing Street Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney has said he “can’t comment” on the sacking of Sir Olly Robbins.

He added: “I know how the Prime Minister works and I think that whatever decision he will have always been weighing up everything including listening to people.

“But I can’t really comment on that decision because I’d left Downing Street at the time.”

Morgan McSweeney insists Lord Mandelson was not his ‘hero’

Morgan McSweeney insisted Lord Peter Mandelson was not his “hero” as he claimed the peer’s appointment as US ambassador was intended to be in the “national interest”.

The ex-Downing Street aide told the Foreign Affairs Committee: “In every advice that I gave to the Prime Minister, hand on heart I thought I was operating in a motive in the national interest.

“In politics, over decades, you know a lot of people. In 20 years in politics, I’ve had to fire friends from jobs.

“I’ve had to turn people down who were desperate for jobs, who were closer friends of mine than Mandelson, who really wanted jobs in No 10, or people who thought they were going to be ministers, because I’ve always tried to operate in national interest.”

He later added: “This was not some hero I was trying to get a job for. I thought that his skills as EU commissioner would help us to get the trade deal that I think the country needed, because we were very, very exposed after Brexit and getting that trade deal right was very important.”

Cabinet Office should have probed Peter Mandelson further, admits Morgan McSweeney

Morgan McSweeney said it would have been “much better” for the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team (Pet) to ask Lord Peter Mandelson follow-up questions, which he said he “didn’t feel” elicited truthful responses from the peer.

Asked whether it had been appropriate for him, a friend of Lord Mandelson, to question him about his links to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, the former chief of staff told MPs: “I think that when I look back on it, I certainly think it would have been much, much better if I’d asked Pet to ask those follow-up questions.

“I guess my thinking at the time was I’d put follow-up questions to him in writing, and that if a senior member of staff did that, that he would feel more obligated to give the truth and the full truth.“I didn’t feel that I got that back from him.

“But it wasn’t my decision. It was the Prime Minister’s decision, and he saw the DV (developed vetting) as part of that decision.”

Mr McSweeney also said: “If the Prime Minister was hearing overwhelmingly against Mandelson, he might have made another decision. But he was getting a lot of views at the time.

“He was listening to people. He does listen to his senior staff. He does listen to his ministers before he reaches a decision. So I think if it was just me arguing for it, I don’t think he’d have made that appointment.”

Morgan McSweeney says Lord Mandelson was the first person to suggest himself for US Ambassador

Morgan McSweeney says Lord Peter Mandelson was the first person to suggest himself to become UK ambassador to the US.

The former Chief of Staff said: “He talked to a lot of people making it clear that he was interested in the job.

“[Sir Keir] was keeping his cards close to his chest waiting to see the outcome of [the US] election.

“There would have been for a Labour administration, a broader range of candidates available to him had the Democrats won that election.”

George Osborne was alternative candidate for US Ambassador, claims Morgan McSweeney

| GETTY

Former Downing Street Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney has said former Conservative Chancellor George Osborne was the alternate candidate to be US Ambassador.

He said: “We procured two strong candidates for him, one was Mandelson, the other was George Osborne, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer.

“I said to the Prime Minister you have two appointable candidates. Others agreed that there was two appointable candidates, I can’t recall anyone saying that Mandelson was not appointable.”

Morgan McSweeney says timing of appointment of Peter Mandelson was not ‘part of a strategy’

Morgan McSweeney has denied the timing of Lord Peter Mandelson’s appointment was “part of a strategy”.

The former Chief of Staff said: “When I came in, we had big challenges in Downing Street. We had to reset.

“Most of my time was immersed in the budget.”

Lord Mandelson was not involved in reshuffle or choosing 2024 candidates, suggests Morgan McSweeney

Morgan McSweeney has suggested Lord Peter Mandelson was not involved in choosing Labour candidates for the 2024 General Election or in the cabinet reshuffle following the resignation of Angela Rayner.

The former Chief of Staff said: “The reshuffle was extremely challenging because it was a bad day for our party, for the Government.

“We had just lost the deputy Prime Minister and we needed to reorganise the Government at pace and the Prime Minister wanted to go ahead and do that.

“He texted me his thoughts… I did not respond to any of Mandelson’s texts. The text messages set out ideas of people that he thought should be in particular positions. None of his suggestions actually came out to be the case so his ideas were not followed up.

“Mandelson had nothing to do with the selection or vetting of any of our parliamentary candidates. I was in a senior role in the party at the time. We did everything on the books.”

Morgan McSweeney denies Lord Mandelson was his ‘mentor’

Morgan McSweeney has denied that Lord Peter Mandelson was his “mentor”.

The former Downing Street Chief of Staff told the Foreign Affairs Committee: “I first had a conversation with Peter Mandelson in 2017.

“I don’t think I really started to go to him for advice until 2021 and I was 44… I didn’t regard him at all as a mentor. I got advice from him and he was useful. But I also had other people around who were perhaps a bit more shy with the media.”

When asked about previous reports “Morgan wouldn’t breathe without consulting Peter Mandelson first”, he responded saying: “You’ll forgive me if I don’t believe everything that’s written about me in the papers.”

Lord Mandelson would not have been appointed if Kamala Harris had won election, claims ​Morgan McSweeney

The former Chief of Staff has said Lord Peter Mandelson would not have been appointed as US Ambassador if Democrat candidate Kamala Harris had won the Presidential election.

Morgan McSweeney said: “I don’t recall there being much discussion about the appointment ahead of the US Presidential election.

“If Kamala Harris had won the US Election, I don’t think Peter Mandelson would have been appointed.”

Morgan McSweeney issues statement to victims of Jeffrey Epstein

Morgan McSweeney has issued a statement addressing the victims and survivors of Jeffrey Epstein.

The former Chief of Staff said: “Too often discussions of public figures and appointments can lose sight of the human suffering at the centre of these matters. Women and girls were abused, exploited and scarred. They deserved protection then and they deserve to be remembered now.

“I am sorry for any part this controversy has played in causing further hurt or distress.

“I have spent much of my working life trying in whatever role I held to make this country fairer, stronger and more successful. I have always believed public service is a privilege.

“It brings responsibility and scrutiny, but also brings a meaningful chance to improve people’s lives. That is what motivated me in government.”

Morgan McSweeney made a ‘serious error of judgement’ in advising Lord Mandelson appointment

Morgan McSweeney is up to give evidence at the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The former Chief of Staff said he made a “serious error of judgement” in advising the Prime Minister in the appointment of Lord Peter Mandelson to US Ambassador.

 James Cleverly calls on Keir Starmer must resign

Sir James Cleverly has said Keir Starmer must resign after he “misled the house”.

The former Home Secretary said: “Starmer has said, on multiple occasions, that the normal, full due process was followed in the Mandelson appointment.

“We now have numerous examples of this not being true. Starmer misled the house, there can be no doubt about that. By his own words that’s a resigning issue.”

Morgan McSweeney to give evidence shortly

That concludes Sir Philip Barton’s appearance in front of the Foreign Affairs Committee this morning.

We’re expecting former Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney to give his evidence just after 11am.

Philip Barton says he won’t be drawn if the right process was followed in the sacking of Olly Robbins 

Former chief civil servant Sir Philip Barton said he won’t comment about the process followed when Sir Olly Robbins was sacked.

When asked if the right process followed in the sacking of Olly Robbins, he said: “I don’t think I can answer that question. And it may become a matter of formal legal dispute.

“When I was permanent undersecretary, there were a number of very serious disciplinary cases during my time leading to dismissal and they all involved some process.”

He added that only Sir Keir Starmer knows fully what happened.

Philip Barton declines to say if ‘due process’ was followed in Lord Mandelson’s appointment

Sir Philip Barton has declined to be drawn into the debate about whether or not “due process” was followed in the appointment of Lord Mandelson.

Appearing before the foreign affairs committee, the former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office was asked: “Do you think that the Prime Minister’s statement that full due process was followed is a fair description of what happened in Mandelson’s case?”

He responded: “I’m gonna dodge. I’m really sorry…It’s not for me, it’s for others including all of you as Members of Parliament to come to a view on that.”

David Lammy was going to ‘flag concerns’ about Lord Mandelson appointment, claims Philip Barton

David Lammy promised the chief Foreign Office civil servant he would flag concerns with Downing Street about the appointment of Lord Mandelson to US Ambassador.

Referring to a conversation in December 2024 Sir Philip Barton said: “I was asked what the Foreign Secretary said when I told him. He did not say ‘Philip, please crack on, write to the King’. He actually said: ‘I’m going to talk to No10.'”

When asked if there were subsequent conversations with Mr Lammy, he said: “As I recall he and I had a brief conversation, I can’t remember whether it was Dec 17 or Dec 18, so the Tuesday or the Wednesday.

“It was inconclusive, so he wasn’t at that point saying he was content for me to proceed. I think [Mr Lammy] should speak for himself on his views and what was said, as it were.

“I at that point was doing my best to resolve the situation, establish what I was being asked to do by the top of the Government, and then take the bureaucratic steps necessary either way.”

Kemi Badenoch says ‘this is no longer just about Peter Mandelson’

| PA

Kemi Badenoch has said “this is no longer just about Peter Mandelson” as she took aim at the Prime Minister.

The Conservative leader said: “It is about whether the Prime Minister tells the truth when Parliament asks, whether he takes responsibility for his own decisions, and whether standards in public life still mean anything at all.

“The country is watching.”

Philip Barton says Downing Street sometimes told him not to share information with Foreign Secretary

Former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office Sir Philip Barton said Downing Street would sometimes tell him to withhold information from the Foreign Secretary.

He said: “It is not unheard of for permanent secretaries, in a sense, to try and work in a way which allows there to be a decision, and a consensus view.

“The Government can then move in and take it forward. And in that sort of situation, it’s not unheard of for a permanent secretary to be privy to something that they don’t pass on to or ask not to rather pass on to their secretary of state. So I describe as not unheard of.

“But I don’t want to give the impression that this is going to a standard operating procedure.”

Chair Emily Thornberry said: “It is absolutely extraordinary. So the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office can be told ‘don’t told your boss about this’ when they are the Foreign Secretary? Honestly, has that ever happened to you before, before this?”

Sir Philip responded: “Yes, it has.”

Philip Barton says there was no contingency plan in place if Lord Mandelson failed security vetting

| GETTY

Sir Philip Barton said there was no “contingency plan” for if Lord Mandelson had not been given security clearance.

The former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office said: “It’s not an impossibility [for Mandelson to have failed vetting].

“But it would have been a crisis if we got to the point where he had no vetting clearance.

“That would have been a crisis, self-evidently, a publicly announced political appointment as the next ambassador to Washington, not being able to go. That would have been a big problem.”

When asked by Committee Chair Dame Emily Thornberry if there a contingency plan for what would happen if Mandelson did not have his security vetting approved, Sir Philip replied “No.”

Philip Barton says he would have raised concerns about Lord Mandelson’s links to Epstein

Former chief civil servant in the Foreign Office Sir Philip Barton said he would have raised concerns about Lord Peter Mandelson’s links to Jeffrey Epstein.

He told the Committee: “Epstein, through both the presidential election campaign in the US and more generally in US politics, was a controversial figure.

“I was worried that [Mandelson’s links to Epstein] could become a problem in future, not because I was expecting that we were going to find out more, because to be honest I wasn’t.

“I just thought that it was a potentially difficult issue politically in the United States.”

Downing Street ‘put pressure’ on Foreign Office over Lord Mandelson appointment 

Downing Street “put pressure” on the Foreign Office “by a particular timescale”, according to the department’s former chief civil servant.

Sir Philip Barton told the Committee: “I didn’t receive letters from the principal private secretary to the Prime Minister very often, most of my dealings was with the Foreign Affairs team in No10 as you’d expect…

“That in effect is the top of the Government saying the Prime Minister has decided he wants Mandelson as ambassador and he wants it done in that timescale.

“So that is what creates the pressure, there were conversations around progress.

“But I think no one in the FCDO working on this could have been in any doubt of the urgency of the issue and the importance that No 10 and the Prime Minister attached to Mandelson being in DC in very short order.”

Philip Barton denies claims Morgan McSweeney told him to ‘just f******g approve’ Lord Mandelson’s security clearance

Morgan McSweeney will give evidence later today | GETTY

Sir Philip Barton has denied claims former Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney told him to “just f******g approve” Mandelson’s security clearance.

The former top Foreign Office civil servant told the Committee: “I cannot recall Morgan McSweeney swearing in a meeting at me or in general.”

Philip Barton claims there was ‘no space’ for dialogue over Lord Mandelson appointment

Sir Philip Barton has claimed there was “no space” for dialogue over the appointment of Peter Mandelson, as he was told to “get on with it.”

He said: “Hindsight is a fantastically wonderful thing and it is all hypothetical.

“It is worth repeating, at no point did anybody consult me, I was presented with a decision and told to ‘get on with it’. There was no space for dialogue.”

However, he was quick to clarify the appointment did not play a part in him leaving his post.

He said: “I announced to the department I was leaving on November 4 2024, and I [didn’t] know anything about Mandelson until the middle of December.

“So the answer is straightforwardly no [it didn’t play a part].”

Philip Barton says he ‘should have been involved’ in appointment of Lord Mandelson

Sir Phillip Barton said he “should have been involved” in the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador.

He told the Foreign Affairs Committee: “I think on the face of it, it is reasonable for the head of the Foreign Office to be involved in thinking around what is our major top bilateral ambassador post.

“On the other hand, given clearly the Prime Minister was deciding to make a political appointment, I think it is also reasonable that civil servants would not be directly involved in discussions around what is a political appointment because that is a matter for elected politicians.

“Clearly, I think, ideally you want to have a situation where there is a tight and small circle of people who can be consulted on a big decision like this on the basis of trust. But I can also see that in the end it would have been a political matter.”

Philip Barton says it ‘wasn’t my choice’ to leave role as chief civil servant in the Foreign Office

Former top Foreign Office civil servant Sir Phillip Barton has claimed it “wasn’t my choice to leave” the role in the department.

Sir Phillip Barton left his post in January 2025, with eight months still left on his contract.

He said: “It wasn’t it wasn’t my choice to leave at that point, and I would have preferred to see out my tenure.”

Sir Phillip claimed then-Foreign Secretary David Lammy wanted someone new in the role to lead the department in a “major transformation programme”.

However, he was quick to add it’s “not unusual” for the top civil servant in a department to leave their post in the months after a change of party in Government.

Philip Barton says process had begun to find new US Ambassador while Tories were in office

Former top Foreign Office mandarin Sir Philip Barton said the search to find a new US Ambassador started while the Tories were in office.

While he said a potential candidate was identified, the process was put on hold when the election was called by Rishi Sunak.

Philip Barton up to answer questions

Former top Foreign Office mandarin Sir Philip Barton is currently being grilled about Lord Peter Mandelson’s vetting for the role of US Ambassador.

Sir Philip was the chief civil servant in the department at the time Mandelson was announced as US Ambassador.

However he left his post shortly after, with claims he wasn’t happy with the appointment, only to be replaced by Sir Olly Robbins, who was sacked by the PM last week.

Keir Starmer says he is ‘still friends’ with Morgan McSweeney

Sir Keir Starmer has said he is “still friends” with his former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney.

Mr McSweeney is set to give evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee this morning at 11am.

The Prime Minister told Sky News: “I’ve known Morgan for a very long time. We worked together in changing the Labour Party and picking it up after a terrible election in 2019, and we’ve worked together on the next general election.”

“I talk to him from time to time, and I think it was two or three weeks ago that we last got together to talk about a number of things.”

When asked about the stories Mr McSweeney called the then head of the Foreign Office Sir Philip Barton and told him to “just f******g approve” Mandelson’s security clearance, Sir Keir said: “That isn’t Morgan McSweeney. That isn’t the way he operates.

“I’ve known Morgan for a very long time, and I’m sure he’ll give his evidence tomorrow. I have no doubt about that.”

Bridget Phillipson claims there was ‘no pressure’ to approve Peter Mandelson appointment

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has claimed there was no “undue pressure” on the Foreign Office to appoint Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US.

She told Sky News: “Was there chasing the outcome of the decision? Yes, I’m sure there was. That’s what happens every day in Government.

“[Was] there undue pressure exerted to influence the outcome, or was there undue pressure exerted in order to either not have vetting at all or to override the vetting decision? No, that was categorically not the case.”

She added the “fundamental problem” is that the vetting decision “was not communicated to the Prime Minister”.

This goes against what Sir Olly Robbins told MPs last week, as the former Foreign Office boss claimed there was an “atmosphere of pressure” over the appointment.

Senior Tory MP says Labour has ‘something to hide’

A senior Conservative MP has suggested Labour has “something to hide” ahead of today’s crunch vote.

Shadow Duchy of Lancaster Alex Burghart told GB News: “We in the Conservatives have been leading on this but we’re working with all the opposition parties as well.

“It is very obvious what has happened here. The Prime Minister lied to parliament and then refused to admit he had done anything wrong.

“We are staring this formal process here, the vote today is if this will be formally investigated by a cross party group of MPs. The fact Labour doesn’t want that to go ahead makes it very clear they have something to hide.”

Keir Starmer to lead talks on economic fallout of Iran war

Sir Keir Starmer will lead talks on the economic fallout of the Iran crisis amid renewed calls from dozens of nations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

The Prime Minister will convene the meeting of the Middle East Response Committee with ministers and representatives from the Bank of England on Tuesday to discuss the ongoing economic impact of the war.

Ministers are expected to gather in one of the Cabinet Office briefing rooms. The Government previously warned that the economic impact could last for eight months after the war’s end.

The meeting comes amid international calls at the United Nations on Monday to reopen the critical shipping lane.

Foreign Office minister Stephen Doughty told the UN Security Council that US President Donald Trump and Sir Keir had this week “discussed the urgent need to get shipping moving again”.

Bridget Phillipson ‘open minded’ about social media restrictions 

| GETTY

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said she was “open minded” about the extent of the restrictions that will be imposed on children’s use of social media.

But she said whatever was put in place has to “stand the test of time”.

She told Times Radio: “It’s not a question of whether we take further action to protect young people, it’s the shape of that action, what that looks like.

“There are a range of views, sincerely held, from campaigners, from families, who have different views as to how we can seek to get this right.”

Elsewhere… Labour MPs urge Keir Starmer to deliver Hillsborough law in full

Labour MPs have warned “buck stops with the Prime Minister” to deliver Hillsborough law in full and stop the delays.

It came as the House of Commons supported a carry-over motion on Monday, meaning the Public Office (Accountability) Bill can continue to progress in the next parliamentary session.

Sir Keir Starmer had promised to deliver the draft law by April 15 last year, to mark the 36th anniversary of the disaster, however, progress was stalled following concerns over changes which could see the proposed duty of candour disapplied to intelligence agencies.

Justice minister Alex Davies-Jones said the Government remains “resolutely committed to delivering this vital piece of legislation” and pledged to bring it back to the chamber “as soon as possible”.

Labour’s Ian Byrne, who was at Hillsborough when 97 Liverpool football fans were killed, said the delays cause “profound distress” and responsibility for them “rests solely with the Government”.

The MP for Liverpool West Derby said: “I welcome the Government tabling this carry-over motion for the Hillsborough law, but in truth, it should never have come to this.”

Before the vote… Morgan McSweeney and ex-Foreign Office chief Philip Barton to face double committee grilling

Morgan McSweeney and former Foreign Office chief Philip Barton are both set to face the Foreign Affairs Select Committee today ahead of the sleaze vote.

Mr McSweeney, Sir Keir Starmer’s one-time right-hand-man, has already admitted to taking “full responsibility” for advising the PM to give Lord Mandelson the ambassador job.

He is likely to face questions today over whether due process was followed, including whether he pressured the Foreign Office to place Lord Mandelson in the role.

The former No10 chief-of-staff may also be grilled on exactly who in Downing Street had pushed for the Labour grandee to be sent to Washington DC without any vetting – as well as the “theft” of his phone shortly after Lord Mandelson was sacked.

Philip Barton, Sir Olly Robbins’s predecessor at the head of the Foreign Office, will doubtless be asked whether Mr McSweeney told him to “just f***ing approve” the appointment, as alleged in the committee last week.

Reform UK’s Zia Yusuf joins PM pile-on with promise to ‘carpet bomb’ Labour seats

| GETTY

Reform UK’s home affairs spokesman Zia Yusuf offered his own scathing take-down of the Prime Minsister last night, threatening to “carpet bomb” his party’s seats depending on how Labour MPs vote.

“Friendly note to Labour MPs ahead of the vote tomorrow to decide if Starmer should face an ethics probe,” Mr Yusuf said.

“If you vote against it, Reform will carpet bomb your constituency to ensure all your constituents know you voted to save the most unpopular PM of all time.”

READ IN FULL: No10’s defence line ahead of sleaze vote this afternoon

“The Government is engaging with the two parliamentary processes that are already running on Peter Mandelson’s appointment with full transparency,” a No10 spokesman said last night.

“This is a desperate political stunt by the Conservative Party the week before the May elections.

“Their claims have no substance.”

Three Labour MPs give their verdict on whether Keir Starmer will survive sleaze vote

Three Labour MPs came out of the woodwork to offer their verdict on whether the PM might survive this afternoon’s sleaze vote last night.

The first, billed as a likely rebel, told The Telegraph they were “not sure many people will want to vote with the Tories” but there was “not much appetite to defend the indefensible”.

The second said they would not be surprised if “a lot of the new intake abstain”, adding: “They’ve been marched up the hill so many times on things to be marched back down again. What if they end up holding an inquiry anyway?”

The third, a senior Labour MP, admitted: “Labour MPs aren’t going to vote for chaos in the week leading up to a local election. We will save the chaos for the week after.”

RECAP: MPs push Troubles Bill through Parliament despite major fears for British troops

Also yesterday evening, MPs voted to push the controversial Troubles Bill through Parliament in the face of fears for the immunity of Northern Ireland veterans.

The Bill will continue to progress in the next parliamentary session, after MPs voted 279 to 176, majority 103, in support of a carry-over motion late on Monday night.

Troubles veterans had been handed protections under the previous Tory Government’s Legacy Act.

But that was rapidly scrapped by Sir Keir Starmer – with Labour claiming the Act was “incompatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

On Sunday night, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch confirmed her MPs would be voting against the carry-over motion – and they did, alongside Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats.

But 279 Labour, Green and Northern Irish SDLP and Alliance MPs were enough to send it through…

READ THE FULL STORY HERE

RECAP: Labour admits it will force internet restrictions on Britons – regardless of what consultation says

In the first of two major developments from the Commons last night, a Labour minister admitted the Government would move to force internet restrictions on young Britons, regardless of the outcome of a consultation on a social media ban.

Education Minister Olivia Bailey revealed the Government “will impose some form of age or functionality restrictions” on social media for under-16s whatever the consultation says.

The concession by the Government comes after relentless pressure from the House of Lords over the issue, led by Tory Education Minister and academy chain founder Lord Nash.

Peers voted four times to press the Commons into forcing a ban onto the British people…

READ THE FULL STORY HERE