Keir Starmer is facing another brutal battle for survival after the Commons Speaker ruled he should face a sleaze vote.
Lindsay Hoyle has granted a debate on whether Sir Keir should be referred to the privileges committee for misleading Parliament over the Mandelson scandal.
The showdown – to be held tomorrow – means Labour MPs will be forced to decide if they can line up behind the floundering leader. A formal inquiry will be launched if the motion is passed.
It will begin just hours after Sir Keir’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and the ex-head of the Foreign Office give potentially explosive evidence about Mandelson’s appointment.
The Government had been pushing to prorogue Parliament on Wednesday morning, which would have allowed Sir Keir to avoid PMQs.
However, that is now impossible as legislation needs to be wrapped up before the session ends.
Downing Street has been mobilising the PM’s few remaining allies, with Labour veterans Alan Johnson and David Blunkett branding the privileges motion a ‘nakedly political stunt’.
However, the fevered mood in the party is intensifying as catastrophic local elections loom next week. There are claims that Andy Burnham has proposed a Blair-Brown style pact to Angela Rayner, making her his deputy if he takes over from Sir Keir.
Keir Starmer is staring down the barrel of a damaging Commons showdown on whether he misled the House over the Mandelson scandal
Sir Keir is struggling to shake free of the long-running row over Mandelson’s (pictured) appointment as US ambassador
The Speaker told the House that ‘numerous’ MPs had requested a debate and he was not taking a view on whether a formal referral should happen
Just 10 per cent of Brits believe Sir Keir has been a good PM, according to a YouGov poll
Addressing the Commons this afternoon, Sir Lindsay said ‘numerous’ MPs had asked for a debate on referring the matter to the privileges committee.
‘Some may be wondering why this issue is being looked at now. To be clear, I cannot determine whether an application is made,’ he said, in a nod to claims from ministers that it is a political tactic ahead of the elections.
‘I have to consider any application when it comes to me. In this case, having taken advice, I’ve decided to allow the House to come to a view on whether the committee of privileges should look at the matter.’
Mr McSweeney – who resigned in February – will be grilled by the foreign affairs committee on his role in the appointment of Mandelson at 11am.
Earlier, at 9am, MPs will also hear from Sir Philip Barton, who was head of the Foreign Office before Olly Robbins – summarily sacked last week for not telling Sir Keir that security vetting checks red-flagged Mandelson.
Foreign Office official Ian Collard, who Sir Olly said briefed him on the vetting findings, will also be giving written evidence.
The PM said last week any claims he misled Parliament had been put to bed by Sir Olly’s evidence.
But the Tories pointed out that Sir Keir did not give full information to the Commons over Mandelson’s vetting.
They have also flagged that Sir Keir appears to have contradicted his own claim that no ‘pressure’ was applied to the Foreign Office to rush Mandelson’s appointment through.
The privileges committee is the same cross-party body that investigated Boris Johnson over the Covid ‘Partygate’ affair.
Yesterday Cabinet minister Darren Jones accused the Conservatives of ‘using tactics’ ahead of local elections on May 7.
The clashes would happen tomorrow, the same day as Sir Keir’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney gives potentially explosive evidence about Mandelson’s appointment
There are claims that Andy Burnham has proposed a Blair-Brown style pact to Angela Rayner (pictured), making her his deputy if he takes over from Sir Keir
Mr Johnson and Lord Blunkett released a joint statement calling the move a ‘nakedly political stunt with no substance’ ahead of the polls.
They said a referral to the watchdog would be a waste of public money and that comparisons with Mr Johnson are ‘absurd’.
‘When Parliament referred that matter to the Privileges Committee, a police investigation had directly disproved his categoric statements that he knew nothing about the breach of lockdown rules including parties in Downing Street, and therefore he had a case to answer for knowingly misleading the House of Commons,’ they said.
Sir Keir tried to move on again this morning with his speech to the Usdaw conference.
Laying out a list of Left-wing achievements, the PM said: ‘The law of the land, for you and for every single person in this country, to finally enjoy the protections you deserve at work: sick pay from day one; paternity leave from day one; fire and rehire – scrapped; protection for whistleblowers; no more gagging orders on sexual harassment; no more exploitative zero-hours contracts; stronger collective consultation rights, and I know how important that is for shop workers.
‘And underpinning all of that, a proper living wage, the embodiment of the simple demand that has always guided the labour movement – a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. That is what we’ve delivered together.’
Sir Keir told the trade union activists he would ‘always fight for working people because I know exactly whose side I’m on’.
‘Let me tell you about another worker, a carer – works long hours on low pay, year after year after year,’ he said.
‘She was a care worker during the pandemic, 14-hour shifts, often overnight. And in the pandemic some care workers didn’t have sick pay.
‘So if they were sick, they had to stay at home and simply not get paid at all. In the pandemic, as we were all clapping them, recognising what they were doing for our country.
‘Well, delegates, that care worker is my sister. And every day I ask myself, does Britain work for her?
‘Does Britain work for people like my late brother? I had a life touched by opportunity. I grew up working class and I’ve been lucky. But Nick, my brother, he had difficulties learning and spent his entire adult life going from one job to the next. Does Britain work for people like him?’
