Ed Davey accuses Starmer of cowardice over Privileges Committee vote
Liberal Democrat leader attacks PM for whipping Labour MPs to block referral over Peter Mandelson US ambassador appointment
نظرة سريعة
- Ed Davey has accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of cowardice after Labour MPs were whipped to vote against referring him to the Privileges Committee over Peter Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador.
- The government won the vote 335 to 223, with opposition parties including the Liberal Democrats, SNP and Reform uniting in favour of the referral.
- Some Labour backbenchers expressed anger at being placed in a position where they would appear complicit in a cover-up.
ملخص مُنشأ بالذكاء الاصطناعي
لماذا يهم
The Privileges Committee is a parliamentary committee that investigates whether ministers have misled the House of Commons. Peter Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador has raised questions about the vetting process, with allegations that Foreign Office officials gave clearance against the vetting agency's recommendation.
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."
Keir Starmer saw off an opposition bid to refer him to a standards committee over Peter Mandelson's appointment after Downing Street deployed its full weight to force Labour MPs to shore up the prime minister. However, the Labour leader bore the brunt of anger from some of his own backbenchers who accused him of creating a situation where they would be perceived as being complicit in "a cover-up."
The vote – tabled by the Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch – was on whether the privileges committee should consider if the prime minister misled the Commons in relation to the disgraced peer taking the role of US ambassador. While it united opposition parties including the Liberal Democrats, SNP, Reform and others, there will have been relief in the government that Labour figures such as Angela Rayner opted to keep their powder dry.
The government won the vote by 335 votes to 223, a majority of 112. Badenoch had opened the debate by accusing the Starmer of forcing his MPs to come out to assist him "to avoid scrutiny". "They are being whipped today to exonerate him before the facts have even been tested," she added.
The Liberal Democrat leader, Ed Davey, likened Starmer's response to the motion to that of Boris Johnson, when the then Conservative MP faced a similar vote that paved the way for an inquiry into whether he misled parliament over alleged breaches of lockdown rules.
"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," said Davey.
Closing the debate for the government, Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister, said: "In recent weeks some have accused the prime minister of dishonesty saying there was no way that Foreign Office officials would have given Peter Mandelson clearance against the vetting agency's recommendation let alone without checking with the prime minister himself."
أسئلة مفتوحة
- What specific information did Foreign Office officials have about Peter Mandelson's vetting?
- Did Keir Starmer personally intervene in the Mandelson appointment?
- Will there be a separate investigation into the Mandelson appointment process?




