Starmer buys some time – but he could be running out of political capital
Keir Starmer deployed the entire Labour machine – cabinet ministers, whips, even Gordon Brown – to shore up his support ahead of what was set to be a critical day for his premiership on Tuesday,And it worked,Labour MPs trooped dutifully through the voting lobbies to block Conservative attempts to refer him to the privileges committee – a process that would have dragged out the Peter Mandelson row and been a painful reminder of Starmer’s original sin of appointing the former Labour spin doctor and minister as his man in Washington,It is not the first time the prime minister’s senior team has come to his rescue,In February, his cabinet rallied round to see off an immediate challenge to his position from Anas Sarwar, Labour’s leader in Scotland.
But despite public displays of support, several warned then he was not out of danger, with one minister adding that his leadership was “in the endgame”.It did, however, win him some breathing space as mutinous MPs stepped back from the brink.The danger may not abate for long.The scandal has come in waves – and each time the story has crashed back into the headlines, Starmer’s authority has been eroded.The Guardian’s revelation more than 10 days ago that Mandelson failed his security vetting is just the latest example.
Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister’s former chief of staff, and Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, prompted yet more questions about Starmer’s decision during four hours of testimony before MPs on Tuesday.While Starmer may have seen off the opposition’s attempt to refer him to the committee that severely weakened Boris Johnson’s premiership, the whole saga – and particularly the government’s decision to whip Labour MPs to vote against – has inflicted even more damage on the prime minister.“It has played into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide and good decent colleagues will be accused of being complicit in a cover-up,” said one.Fifteen Labour MPs rebelled against the government and dozens more did not vote.Labour MPs now appear united on two issues: the view that sending Mandelson to Washington in the first place was a catastrophic misjudgment; and a deep frustration that the scandal has sucked up all the oxygen at Westminster just before crucial elections next week.
Some questioned whether the government’s heavy-handed approach was necessary for a vote they probably would have won anyway.Few MPs had the appetite to hand the Tories a victory or unintentionally precipitate a leadership contest before they were ready.Even some loyalist MPs who are willing Starmer to survive admit that he has expended a worrying amount of political capital.“Keir only has so much credit in the bank with the backbenches now, so he needs to spend it wisely,” said one minister.Others were more defensive.
“He was damned if he did whip MPs to vote against the referral and damned if he didn’t,” a cabinet minister said.“Why take the risk when you don’t have to?”, a cabinet source added.After parliament prorogues this week, MPs will return to their constituencies to help campaign in what most expect will be a devastating set of elections for Labour right across the country.Starmer’s allies know his immediate response when the results start to roll in after 7 May is perhaps the biggest moment of jeopardy yet for his leadership.They say he will be humble and frank, echoing the former US president Barack Obama who talked of a “shellacking” when the Democrats took a heavy beating in the 2010 midterms.
Downing Street also wants to “inject some hope” into the government’s narrative, with senior figures pointing to the king’s speech the following week as an opportunity to do so, although they admit this won’t be easy, given the economic fallout from the Middle East crisis.So Starmer will rely for the third time in as many months on the Labour machine rallying round.But every time he does, his power is further diminished, and his political capital eaten up.“It’ll be his last chance to do so,” said one usually loyal MP.The question remains: will it even work?
Drop the ‘toxic hot potato’: what Barton and McSweeney really revealed about the Mandelson scandal
The latest two witnesses to testify to parliament over Peter Mandelson’s appointment had plenty to offer headline writers. “A toxic hot potato” was how Philip Barton, the former top civil servant in the Foreign Office, described Mandelson’s links with Jeffrey Epstein, a view he would have shared with Downing Street if only he had been asked.“A knife through my soul” was how Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister’s former chief adviser, described the moment he found out the true nature of Mandelson’s relationship with the convicted child sex offender.But the most interesting parts of both men’s evidence on Tuesday were those that addressed the question at the core of the scandal: was the Foreign Office’s decision to grant Mandelson security clearance against the advice of the vetting agency influenced by pressure from Downing Street?Both Barton and McSweeney agreed there was pressure put on the department over Mandelson’s security vetting. Both, however, maintained it had no bearing on the decision in late January 2025 to grant Mandelson clearance
Shabana Mahmood’s frustration with immigration debate is understandable | Letter
Zoe Williams criticises Shabana Mahmood’s recent language as showing “contempt for the values of her own party”, but I disagree (Shabana Mahmood’s expletive was shocking. But not for the reason you think, 23 April). In today’s polarised climate, too many on the progressive side treat any divergence on issues like immigration as indistinguishable from Reform UK. That simply isn’t true.Mahmood’s language may have been coarse, but her frustration is understandable
America has special relationship with Israel now, UK’s new US ambassador says
The UK’s new ambassador to the US has described Keir Starmer as having been “on the ropes” over the Peter Mandelson scandal and said it is Israel rather than Britain that has a “special relationship” with the White House.Christian Turner, who took office in February to replace Mandelson as the UK’s most senior diplomat in Washington, made the remarks privately to a group of students visiting the US in the same month he was appointed.His remarks are embarrassing for Downing Street because they emerged in the same week that the king is carrying out his state visit under the president, Donald Trump, who has previously described Mandelson as a “really bad pick”.Mandelson was sacked by the prime minister last year for misleading him over the depth of his friendship with the late child sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein.Turner, 53, told the students it was “extraordinary” that the Epstein scandal “hasn’t touched anybody” in the US, while it had “brought down” Mandelson and “potentially the prime minister”, the Financial Times reported
Morgan McSweeney does no lasting damage to Starmer in grilling by Emily Thornberry | John Crace
He walks! He talks! He breathes! For most people, Morgan McSweeney is a quasi-mythical creature. A being that exists almost entirely in the shadows. If at all. Away from the public gaze. The legendary slayer of the Labour left, rumoured to have been shaped in the dark arts by Peter Mandelson, who went on to become the eyes and ears of the prime minister
McSweeney admits pressuring Foreign Office to expedite Mandelson role
Morgan McSweeney has admitted that Foreign Office officials came under intense pressure to expedite Peter Mandelson’s posting as UK ambassador to Washington, but denied they were forced to “skip steps” in security vetting to do so.Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff, who resigned earlier this year over the scandal, acknowledged that he had asked the then top official at the department, Philip Barton, to conduct the process “at pace” but not to do anything “improper”.In a rare appearance before MPs on Tuesday, McSweeney said: “There is a real difference between asking people to act at pace and asking people to lower standards. We never did that. We never asked people to skip steps at any part of the process
What did Morgan McSweeney and Philip Barton tell MPs about Mandelson’s vetting?
Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister’s former chief of staff, gave his first public appearance at a high-stakes hearing of the foreign affairs select committee to be grilled on the appointment – and vetting – of the disgraced US ambassador Peter Mandelson. He was preceded by the former Foreign Office chief Philip Barton, who oversaw the early formal process for Mandelson’s appointment. Here’s what we learned.Barton said that there was “absolutely” pressure on the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) to get Mandelson to Washington as quickly as possible, though he drew the same distinction as the prime minister that there was a difference between pressure to grant vetting and pressure to do the process quickly.He said that No 10 was “uninterested” in the vetting process, and the inquiries were about the pace at which he could arrive in Washington, ideally before the inauguration
The surprising boom in blouge wine: ‘It’s for 5pm, in the sun’
How to make the perfect custard creams – recipe | Felicity Cloake's How to make the perfect …
Impala, London W1: ‘Shamelessly, brilliantly too much’ – restaurant review | Grace Dent on restaurants
Ifrah F Ahmed’s debut cookbook is a love letter to Somali cuisine, history and people
Lure of being a social media chef means youngsters forgoing classic training, Michelin star cook warns
Disco hit: Penne alla vodka, popular in New York 80s clubs, is now a menu staple