Starmer faces Commons showdown over Mandelson vetting scandal | Keir Starmer

Keir Starmer will make a major statement to MPs on Monday as he tries to overcome fears within his government that the Peter Mandelson review scandal could cost him his leadership.

In what will be a dramatic showdown, the prime minister will explain how Mandelson was able to take on the role of ambassador to Britain without announcing that he had overruled the Foreign Office’s decision to fail the investigation.

The scandal, first revealed by the Guardian last week, led to the sacking of the Foreign Office’s top civil servant, Olly Robbins, who is due to appear before MPs on Tuesday in what could be another moment of great peril for Starmer.

After opposition party leaders called on Starmer to resign over the incident, ministers spent the weekend trying to support Starmer’s position, arguing that he would not have proceeded to send her to Washington if he had known about it.

But senior government officials fear this week could be a make or break for the prime minister, despite being strengthened by his handling of the Iran crisis, if more damaging information emerges or if skeptical Labor MPs finally lose faith.

“We don’t know how it will all turn out, but all roads lead to the original temptation: Keir’s decision to appoint Peter Mandelson to Washington despite everyone knowing he was a high risk. This week could go either way,” he said.

Starmer said on Sunday he would make it “clear” to MPs that he was in the dark about Mandelson’s review and that it was “inexcusable” that the Foreign Office did not tell him after telling MPs that due process had been followed.

The Prime Minister will reveal the facts about Mandelson’s security clearance after instructing officials to urgently establish the information when he was finally given the verdict last Tuesday.

Downing Street also sought to rebut claims by Robbins’ allies that he was prevented by law from telling ministers that Mandelson had failed the review, arguing there was a difference between being involved in the decision and being informed about it.

It published an explanatory document stating: “No law prevents civil servants from sensitively marking UK vetting recommendations while accurately safeguarding detailed sensitive vetting information to allow ministers to make decisions about appointments or explain matters to parliament.”

At the same time, Starmer said: Daily Mirror: “It is surprising that I was not told that Peter Mandelson had failed his security clearance when he was appointed.

“It is inexcusable that I was not told when I told parliament that due process was being followed and that is why I plan to set out the facts behind this in parliament on Monday, so there is full transparency on this matter.

“But am I angry because I wasn’t told? Yes, I am. Am I angry because other ministers weren’t told? Yes, I am. I should have been told, but I wasn’t told.”

Robbins, meanwhile, is understood to receive legal advice after being sacked as head of the Foreign Office and will answer questions from the foreign affairs select committee about the scandal on Tuesday.

The former senior civil servant is understood to be angry at what he believes is his unfair treatment by the prime minister and is determined to tell his side of the story after his sacking caused a chill in Whitehall.

Deputy prime minister David Lammy told the Guardian voters wanted stability, not a “self-flagellating, inward-focused” ruling party.

There has been frequent speculation about a leadership contest following brutal local and devolved elections for Labor next month. But in recent weeks Labor MPs appeared to have backed down.

“The idea of ​​removing a leader in the middle of 2026 because of poor domestic results, when there is a serious global crisis affecting prices and affordability, is just pie in the air if you think voters will thank us for it,” Lammy said.

“What happens if we do this too quickly, people call a general election. And I’m not sure now is the time to call a general election.”

Technology secretary Liz Kendall insisted Starmer was not gambling with national security by appointing Mandelson as the government sought to limit the fallout from the scandal.

Asked why he had not lost his job over the scandal, as a growing list of civil servants had done, he said it was because Starmer was “making the right calls on the big calls facing this country”, including on global issues.