Labour MPs face a ‘lose-lose’ vote on Starmer sleaze inquiry

P.Poor Labor MPs expected to be wandering the lobbies on Tuesday to decide whether Sir Keir Starmer should be investigated for contempt of Parliament.

Privately, some are already complaining about being in a “lose-lose situation” as Sir Keir is expected to ignore the precedent set by Boris Johnson in April 2022 and force MPs to vote against the move.

As one Labor MP put it, if they voted to support the Privileges Committee investigation into whether the Prime Minister misled parliament, they would be “inviting months of chaos and speculation” while giving the Conservatives an unnecessary victory.

But many are reluctant to support a badly injured prime minister who is expected to face a serious challenge to his leadership within weeks.

No wonder a member of parliament said this Independent He said his colleagues were demanding excuses so they could “go and campaign in local elections” and “not let this whole story be tainted”.

But ultimately the deciding factor here may be the comparison with what happened to Mr Johnson. And those who contributed to the former prime minister’s sentencing for lying to parliament have mixed views on what should happen to Sir Keir.

Does Starmer have a case to answer?

Allegations that Sir Keir misled parliament focus on whether he knew Peter Mandelson had failed his security clearance for the US ambassador post. Independent He informed Downing Street seven months ago, the first he had learned of this compared to earlier this month. There are also allegations that Sir Olly Robbins, the permanent secretary he sacked in the investigation scandal, misrepresented evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

Then again the question arises: Independentabout whether he wanted an explanation from Sir Olly before dismissing him. He told MPs he had but sources close to Sir Olly suggested he had not.

A potential Labor rebel asked the question that overshadowed the entire debate: “If the Prime Minister is clear and confident that he has done nothing wrong, why doesn’t he send himself in to get a clean bill of health from committee and spare his MPs and council candidates the drama and controversy of a debate and vote tomorrow?”

Deliberately misleading Parliament is considered a resignation offense for ministers, and an investigation by the privileges committee in 2023 led to Mr Johnson stepping down as an MP. Comparisons have been made between the pair, but Downing Street maintains Starmer was speaking from information available to him at the time and that those involved in the Johnson inquiry had mixed views.

A member of the Privileges Committee investigating Mr Johnson is not sure the two cases are the same.

“It was even more obvious that Boris Johnson misled parliament because he said ‘no rules and guidelines had been breached during the lockdown.’ This was clearly false and misleading.

“The issue is much more nuanced and complex when it comes to Keir Starmer.”

Another former member of the committee noted: “You have to remember that before the Privileges Committee can investigate, a very high threshold must be met that the deception of the House impedes the proper functioning of parliament.”

However, the third pointed out: “Direction is not a presumption of guilt in itself. It says that there is a situation that needs to be taken into account. In this sense, if the prime minister is sure that he did not mislead the parliament, there is nothing to worry about.”

Why did Boris Johnson allow an investigation to be launched against him?

Independent He understands Kemi Badenoch will state that his party has some moral authority on the issue because Mr Johnson allowed the investigation without a vote and because Conservative MPs on the committee investigated him fairly and found him guilty.

In 2022, Mr Johnson intended to oppose a motion to refer Sir Keir to the committee he introduced but was persuaded not to do so at the last minute to avoid a crisis.

One former MP noted: “Many of us spoke to the chief whip and made it clear that if there was a vote the prime minister would split the party and cause even more damage.”

Another said: “We felt like he was lying and that we couldn’t in good conscience vote against it.”

On April 21, 2022, it was announced that the government would accept the motion without debate or vote.

What can Starmer do to save himself?

Apart from whipping Labor MPs into rejecting the motion and causing all sorts of potential political harm to himself, his party and those same MPs by doing so, there is another solution.

In the Johnson case, it was initially decided that if Johnson came to them and corrected the records, the matter would be over and there would be no investigation.

“The rules state that you have to correct the statement at the earliest opportunity. And in fact, if nothing else has happened in the meantime, then the earliest opportunity would be when you’re giving evidence to us. There’s no specific time,” says a former committee member.

“So when Boris Johnson came to give evidence to us, we decided to ask him if he wanted to set the record straight and say that, in fact, the rules and guidance had not always been followed during lockdown in Number 10. He could have just said that and then he would have set the record straight and that would have happened without the need for further action.”

The problem was that Mr Johnson rejected the opportunity, resulting in a 90-day suspension even though he had resigned as an MP.

If it comes to that, Sir Keir might want to see if he needs to learn from that mistake.