Speaker Lindsay Hoyle has handed Prime Minister Keir Starmer an unexpected political headache by granting a Commons debate on whether Starmer misled Parliament over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador. The decision, announced on Monday, came despite widespread expectations that Hoyle would reject the application from Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch as frivolous.
Badenoch had sought a debate to refer Starmer to the privileges committee, arguing that the prime minister misled the House when he said due process was followed in Mandelson's vetting. However, her case appeared weak: she initially claimed Starmer lied by denying knowledge of Mandelson's failed vetting, but later retracted that after evidence showed he was not informed. Her subsequent accusations focused on whether Starmer misled MPs about due process and whether No 10 pressured officials to approve Mandelson.
In his statement, Hoyle acknowledged that such debates are a measure of last resort and should be granted sparingly. Yet he concluded that the application met the threshold, while stressing that granting the debate did not imply guilt. The move surprised many, as Hoyle had previously clashed with Starmer over PMQs protocol and has grown frustrated with the government announcing policy outside Parliament.
The debate is set to take place before the local elections in 10 days, giving Badenoch a platform to embarrass the prime minister. Starmer's allies argue the referral is baseless, noting that Mandelson's appointment followed unorthodox but lawful procedures, and that the independent official who approved him, Olly Robbins, has defended his decision.
