What would Keir Starmer do?

How can we put this delicately? 

Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson acquired a reputation over many, many years for acting as if the usual rules didn’t apply to him. It cost him several jobs, including his role as Prime Minister.

The then opposition leader, Keir Starmer, played the prosecutorial role in a very effective manner. He sought to draw a dividing line in politics between those who played by the rules and those who did not. 

Ultimately, the former Prime Minister was found to have committed ‘a serious contempt of Parliament’ by deliberately misleading the House. He decided to quit, rather than face his punishment. 

Less than 3 years on, and 3 Prime Ministers later, it’s Keir Starmer who’s now in the firing line, over his appointment of Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador.

And it could well end up in a similar place to where Boris Johnson ended up.

We now know that what the Prime Minister told Parliament in both September and February about Mandelson’s appointment, gave a very false impression. The Prime Minister repeatedly said that the correct processes were followed regarding Mandelson’s appointment.  This misled everyone into concluding Mandelson had passed his vetting. 

But yesterday it was revealed he hadn’t and that the Foreign Office had overruled this failure and appointed him anyway. We are told that neither the Prime Minister nor the Foreign Secretary were aware about this until THIS week!

The leading civil servant at the Foreign Office was fired last night, presumably because of what he did in this case.

But can we really believe that no one in Downing Street was aware of what went on in such a high profile appointment? And after the scandal around Mandelson broke, SEVEN MONTHS later that still no one in Downing Street knew what had happened.

We can have a fair guess about what opposition leader Keir Starmer might have said had Prime Minister Johnson been telling a story like this.

Unlock Democracy has always been clear, the rules apply to everyone equally and Prime Ministers, whichever party they represent, have the greatest responsibility of all to play by those rules. 

Which brings us to the core question - what would Keir Starmer do if he was opposition leader rather than Prime Minister right now? Would he believe the denials coming from Number 10? Would he believe that such a huge decision on Mandelson’s failed vetting could take place without someone in Number 10 approving it or knowing about it?

So what should happen now?

First and foremost, ALL the documents relating to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador must be released unredacted. Transparency must come first.

Second, the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, must launch an investigation. In March, Sir Magnus refused to do this as ‘the relevant process for a political appointee has been followed’. 

Whilst a convoluted semantic argument can be made that that was true, the new information that has emerged about the failed vetting makes an investigation inevitable.

The public deserves to know what happened. Did the Prime Minister knowingly mislead Parliament on Mandelson’s appointment? Can everything be pinned on a single civil servant acting alone and without any knowledge of the Foreign Secretary or anyone in No 10?

Where is the apology and who is actually going to take responsibility for the deceit that’s taken place?

It gives us no joy to say any of this. Lessons should have been learned from the scandals that buffeted the previous Government. But right now, this looks incredibly like more of the same that we saw all too frequently under Prime Minister Johnson.

It’s time for transparency, a full independent investigation and for those who have broken the rules to be held to account, no matter who they are.

What would Keir Starmer say and do if he was still opposition leader? 

It’s time for action.