Becky Morton
Political reporter

Before we jump into PMQs, here's a recap of Keir Starmer's former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney giving evidence on Tuesday to the Foreign Affairs Committee.

He told the committee he had made "a serious mistake" in recommending the appointment of Lord Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US.

McSweeney, who resigned in February over the matter, said he felt the peer's experience as an EU trade envoy would help the UK secure a US trade deal.

But he told MPs that after fresh revelations about Mandelson's friendship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein emerged, "it was like a knife through my soul".

The BBC understands Mandelson's view is that he answered questions about his relationship with Epstein in the vetting process accurately.

• We've a full recap of Morgan McSweeney's testimony in our news story

Image source, Reuters

The prime minister has just left a sunny No 10 and is on his way down the road to the House of Commons.

You can watch live at the top of the page as he's grilled by Kemi Badenoch and other MPs at noon - just tap the button at the top of the page.

After her motion for Keir Starmer to face a parliamentary probe failed, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch suggested "Labour MPs will rue the day" they voted against it. She said the public would now "see they believe there's one rule for Labour and another for everyone else".

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said if the PM "truly felt his conduct over the Mandelson scandal was up to scratch he should have undergone investigation by the Privileges Committee". Davey also accused Starmer of governing in a "cowardly" way.

Reform leader Nigel Farage said he was not surprised at the result: "The vote in Parliament tonight was great theatre, but the three-line whip meant it would never be close".

Meanwhile, the SNP's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said Labour MPs "cannot outrun Peter Mandelson, they cannot outrun their own prime minister and his record".

During the debate, Green MP Ellie Chowns suggested the vote wasn't about whether the prime minister "definitively" and deliberately misled the House, but about whether there's a "case to answer". She added that it was "absolutely clear" there was.

Also ahead of the vote, Plaid Cymru's Ann Davies said it was "an insult to us all" that Labour was attempting to "swat away" the Tory-led motion as a "stunt".

Beyond the headline win, this was not a victorious moment for Starmerpublished at 10:55 BST

10:55 BST

Alex Forsyth
Political correspondent

Image source, Getty Images

There can be moments of high jeopardy in Parliament when Westminster holds its breath to await the outcome of a crucial debate that could determine a government's future.

In the end this didn't feel like one of them, but that doesn't mean Keir Starmer has escaped unscathed.

Ultimately he won the vote pretty comfortably with a clear majority of MPs rejecting the idea that he should be referred to a parliamentary committee for investigation into his statements about Lord Mandelson's appointment as US ambassador.

But beyond the headline win, this was not a victorious moment. No 10 expended considerable political capital in keeping its troops onside.

There was undoubtedly support from some Labour backbenchers, pointing to ongoing work to shed light on the process surrounding Mandelson's appointment and rejecting the notion another inquiry was necessary.

Others said opposition parties were playing political games ahead of crucial elections, something denied by the Conservatives who insisted this was about the integrity of Parliament.

In the end, 14 Labour MPs voted against the government and while they were predominantly people who've previously criticised the prime minister, some of their interventions were scathing.

Late on Tuesday, MPs voted against a motion that sought to trigger a parliamentary investigation into claims Keir Starmer misled the Commons over the vetting for Lord Mandelson following his appointment as US ambassador.

The result was 335 to 223 against the motion - below you can see how every MP voted, including your own.

Image source, PA Media

Keir Starmer is due in the House of Commons at midday for Prime Minister's Questions, a day after seeing off a bid by opposition MPs to launch a parliamentary inquiry into claims he misled the Commons over the vetting of Lord Mandelson.

MPs voted against the Tory-led motion by 335 to 223, with a few Labour MPs rebelling against the government.

After the vote, Labour accused the Tories of a "desperate political stunt" ahead of crucial elections in Scotland, Wales and England. Badenoch said Labour MPs would "rue the day" they sided with the PM.

All this came after the PM's former chief of staff appeared before MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee, acknowledging he had made a "serious mistake" in recommending Mandelson as US ambassador.

So what will we hear from the Commons today? Stick with us as we take you through the latest.

Image source, PA/House of Commons

Prime Minister Keir Starmer will not face a parliamentary investigation over claims he misled MPs about the process to appoint Lord Mandelson as US ambassador.

The government won the vote by 335 to 223 - with 14 Labour MPs rebelling.

Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch accused the majority of Labour MPs of being "complicit" in a "cover up". Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said Starmer had "ducked" scrutiny over the issue, saying it was a "cowardly way to govern".

Starmer has denied misleading MPs. A No 10 spokesperson called the vote a "desperate political stunt" ahead of next week's elections, and said the government will continue to engage "with the two parliamentary processes that are running on Peter Mandelson’s appointment with full transparency".

Earlier in the day, former top civil servant in the Foreign Office, Philip Barton, said No 10 was "uninterested" in his concerns over Mandelson's links to Epstein.

And former top aide to Starmer, Morgan McSweeney, said he made a "serious mistake" in advising the PM to appoint the former ambassador, but said Mandelson hadn't been "open enough".

We're bringing our live coverage to a close now, but you can read more here:

• I made 'serious mistake' advising Starmer to appoint Mandelson, PM's ex-top adviser says
• PM won't face inquiry over claims he misled MPs on Mandelson vetting
• No way to raise Mandelson concerns, former senior official says

As we've been reporting, fourteen Labour MPs voted against the government. They are:

• Rebecca Long-Bailey
• John McDonnell

• Apsana Begum
• Mary Kelly Foy
• Emma Lewell
• Kate Osborne
• Richard Burgon
• Imran Hussain
• Grahame Morris
• Ian Byrne
• Brian Leishman
• Andy McDonald
• Luke Myer
• Nadia Whittome

Cat Smith, also a Labour MP, was recorded as voting both for and against the motion, with her votes effectively cancelling each other out - the reason is unclear, but it is usually regarded as a formal abstention.

Image source, Getty Images

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch says Labour MPs will "rue the day" they voted against referring the prime minister to the Privileges Committee.

"To save his own skin, Keir Starmer threatened his MPs with the loss of their jobs unless they helped cover up his misleading statements to Parliament. It is a disgrace that 333 Labour MPs chose to be complicit in that cover up," she says.

"This is a government coming apart at the seams," she adds.

"Labour MPs will rue the day that they voted against this motion, because it is the day that people saw they believe there’s one rule for Labour and another for everyone else.”

Lib Dem leader Ed Davey says: "Starmer has ducked the scrutiny he should have faced by forcing Labour MPs to defend him. What a cowardly way to govern."

"If he truly felt his conduct over the Mandelson scandal was up to scratch he should have undergone investigation by the Privileges Committee," he adds.

Image source, EPA

Fourteen Labour MPs have rebelled against the government by voting in favour of launching an investigation into Keir Starmer over his appointment of Lord Mandelson.

Largely from the left on the party, these included Rebecca Long-Bailey and John McDonnell.

The motion was rejected by 223 to 335 - a majority of 112.

Correction 28 April 2026: This post previously listed Karl Turner as one of the Labour MPs who voted in favour of launching an investigation into Keir Starmer. Turner did vote in favour of the motion, but he sits as an independent MP after being suspended from Labour's parliamentary party in March, so his name has been removed.

Image source, House of Commons

Speaker of the House of Commons Lindsay Hoyle says MPs were heckled as they voted on whether to refer the prime minister to the Privileges Committee.

Speaking after giving the voting figures, Hoyle says: “Can I just say, a member of Parliament has been to complain to me, and another member.

“When other members are shouting ‘shame’ when they’re voting, it is not acceptable and it will not be tolerated.”

He urged those responsible to apologise to people they shouted at.

The government's won the vote... but there's disgruntlement among some Labour MPspublished at 18:46 BST 28 April

18:46 BST 28 April

Iain Watson
Political correspondent

From the government's point of view, that vote has been won but there is still quite a lot of disgruntlement we're picking up.

The only people who were really vocally critical of the prime minister, or were supportive on the Labour benches of the idea that this would be looked into via a parliamentary inquiry, were those on the left of the party.

Many of those who defended the prime minister were the new intake in 2024, who owe their seats to that big Labour landslide.

Lots of others were saying we're here just to get this job done. They didn't want to vote with the Conservatives, but they weren't exactly brimming with enthusiasm either.

Joe Pike
Politics reporter

Responding to the government's victory in blocking a Privileges Committee investigation, a No 10 spokesperson says: “This Labour government is delivering for Britain including bringing down energy bills, cutting hospital waiting lists and lifting half a million children out of poverty.

“The Conservative Party resorted to this desperate political stunt the week before the May elections because they have no answers on the cost of living or the NHS.

“We will continue to engage with the two parliamentary processes that are running on Peter Mandelson’s appointment with full transparency.”

MPs have voted 223 to 335 against referring Prime Minister Keir Starmer to the Privileges Committee, the Speaker says as he reads out the results in the House of Commons.

Image source, House of Commons

Moments before the vote begaun, Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister Darren Jones accused the opposition of a "desperate search for something that will stick" as he argued all due process was followed when it came to appointing Lord Mandelson.

Jones said when the Prime Minister received new information about Mandelson's association with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, he asked for full facts to be established and then presented them to the House of Commons.

"The prime minister and indeed the whole government recognised the importance of transparency in respect of Peter Mandelson's appointment and dismissal as ambassador," he said.

However, Jones criticised Tory leader Kemi Badenoch's motion proposing the PM facing a parliamentary inquiry over Lord Mandelson's vetting, calling it "politically motivated".

After debating the motion for several hours, MPs in the House of Commons are now voting on whether to refer Prime Minister Keir Starmer to the Privileges Committee.

You can watch live at the top of this page and we should get the result of the vote shortly.

We're now on to the closing remarks of the debate.

Conservative shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Alex Burghart, calls today's motion "simple" and says it forms a process which has "long-existed to resolve issues such as these".

He adds "members of all parties believe that there is reason to believe that the prime minister may have misled this House".

"If the government has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear," Burghart adds.

Labour has called the vote a political "stunt".

Just over a week from polling day... yet again Westminster is consumed by the Mandelson sagapublished at 17:51 BST 28 April

17:51 BST 28 April

Chris Mason
Political editor

I send you this report as I overlook Cardiff Bay, having woken this morning in Edinburgh.

My geographical context is the political context – the devolved elections in Scotland and Wales next week, a live TV debate in the Welsh capital tonight, and local elections in many parts of England.

A week and a bit out from polling day and yet again, for hour after hour today, Westminster has been consumed by the Lord Mandelson saga.

Image source, EPA

Another painstaking, slow motion dissection of the prime minister’s most catastrophic decision in office; its innards, its entrails scattered daily across the political and news agenda.

Whether diminishing returns are now evident in the case made around all this by the government’s critics is secondary to the blunt reality for ministers that all this simply won’t go away.

Some of that, yes, is the desire of opposition parties to keep talking about it.

But the arc of this was set before the latest blow up of the last week or two – with Parliament’s earlier demands for so many documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s stint in America.

And there are many more of those documents still to come.

Image source, House of Commons

As the debate draws near its conclusion, we've been hearing from a few more MPs.

• Ellie Chowns, Green Party MP for North Herefordshire, says the situation is "deeply frustrating" and reiterates calls for Starmer to resign. She says the vote today isn't on whether the prime minister "definitively" and deliberately misled the house, but about whether there's a "case to answer". Chowns says it's "absolutely clear" he does

• Sarah Bool, Conservative MP for South Northamptonshire, says "alarm bells should have been ringing" before Mandelson's appointment, given his two previous dismissals, but this was "brushed aside in a rush" for him to become the UK's ambassador to the US. Bool adds the PM has a "duty" to answer questions - and the "perfect mechanism" for this is the Privileges Committee
• Dave Doogan, the SNP's MP for Angus and Perthshire Glens, says the PM's version of events is "inconsistent" with evidence. He adds it is "no defence" that Starmer did not know the full extent of Mandelson's relationship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, when it was already public that the relationship existed

Labour should win the vote comfortably... but Badenoch may feel she's gained valuable ammunitionpublished at 17:35 BST 28 April

17:35 BST 28 April

Iain Watson
Political correspondent

Image source, House of Commons

The prime minister should win tonight’s vote comfortably. However, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch will have gained what she sees as valuable ammunition - being able to accuse Labour politicians of a "cover up" by refusing to refer Starmer to the Privileges Committee.

Only those on Labour’s left have so far indicated they will vote with the opposition, although we should keep any eye on the number of abstentions as a better gauge of discontent.

One disgruntled MP points out that many of the supportive speeches for Starmer have come from the 2024 intake who owe their seats to the landslide masterminded by Starmer's former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney.

Interestingly, even a senior Conservative politician was privately bemoaning the "draining" effect the Mandelson fallout is having on Westminster, and politics more widely.

It is also dragging opposition politicians away from campaigning in May’s elections. For them, the prorogation - the end of this parliamentary session - can’t come quickly enough.