PMQs latest: Starmer to face Badenoch after surviving Tory-led call for sleaze inquiry over Mandelson scandal

Mr Reed said that he is “crystal clear” the government is “not doing” a rent freeze for private tenants.

His firm rejection follows reports that the chancellor had declined to rule out the measure on Tuesday.

Questions are being asked over whether Keir Starmer has lost his authority after 15 Labour MPs who rebelled on Tuesday night were not suspended from the parliamentary party.

The MPs mostly from the leftwing Socialist Campaign Group voted in favour of Sir Keir to be investigated by the Privileges Committee over allegations he misled Parliament.

This was despite a three line whip ordering MPs to back the PM.

But one rebel told The Independent: “We haven’t been contacted. My guess is they may just want to move on.”

They added: “I think it would elongate a damaging story / focus for them and ‘Starmer punishes MPs for saying he should answer questions’ isn’t a good look for a man who says he has nothing to hide.”

However, it has been noted that with previous rebellions on two child benefits and welfare reform Sir Keir has moved swiftly to suspend rebels from the parliamentary party.

Political editor David Maddox explains that while the prime minister may have escaped a sleaze inquiry, the impact of what happened in the Commons on Tuesday will be felt for a long time to come.

Steve Reed has ruled out introducing rent controls after Rachel Reeves appeared to hint at help for tenants to ease the cost of living,

The housing secretary said he is “crystal clear” the Government is “not doing” a freeze for private tenants, despite the Chancellor declining to reject the idea on Tuesday.

He rejected suggestions the Government had been ambiguous about its stance on the prospect of rent controls to avoid losing voters to the Greens, who have made the measure a flagship policy.

Asked whether Ms Reeves had left the door open to a freeze as part of a ploy to dampen the threat from Zack Polanski’s party in the May elections, Mr Reed told Times Radio: “No. I think I’ve just been crystal clear, we’re not doing it.”

The Guardian reported earlier this week that the Chancellor was considering a one-year freeze to help ease the cost-of-living burden caused by the Iran war.

Asked to “examine the case for a fixed-term rent freeze” by Labour MP Yuan Yang in the Commons, Ms Reeves said on Tuesday: “This Government have already taken action to reduce the cost of living and to bear down on inflation with the changes around energy prices, around fuel duty, prescription charges and rail fares.

“I will do everything in my power and use every lever we have to bear down on the cost of living, including for people in the private rented sector.”

Asked about his Cabinet colleague’s remarks, Mr Reed said: “You’d need to ask her about the particular language she may have used but she was probably referring, I would guess, without having been there, to the fact that we’re changing the law to give renters additional rights… the biggest increase in rights for renters in a generation.”

Britain’s ambassador to Washington said Sir Keir Starmer was “on the ropes” amid the fallout over the appointment of Peter Mandelson and suggested Labour could “remove” him after next month’s local elections, according to reports.

In what will be seen as highly outspoken comments for a career diplomat, a leaked recording released as King Charles visits the US appears to show Sir Christian Turner saying that Lord Peter Mandelson and “potentially the prime minister” had been “brought down” by the affair.

Sir Christian, who replaced Lord Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US after the latter was sacked over his links to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, also criticised America’s political system, saying it was “extraordinary” that the scandal “hasn’t touched anybody” on the other side of the Atlantic.

He also said that America’s only “special relationship” – which has been under significant strain for months – was with “probably Israel”, not the UK.

Parliament can sometimes be an illuminating place. The latest testimony on the Mandelson scandal to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee has revealed that the legendary figure of Morgan McSweeney – the man credited by Sir Keir Starmer with rebuilding the Labour Party, and who, mostly unseen and unheard, was assumed to be a cross between Stalin’s sinister KGB henchman Lavrentiy Beria and the wildman Begbie in Trainspotting – is, in fact, a mild-mannered, soft-spoken and thoughtful individual.

It had been supposed that it was the prime minister’s former chief of staff who had pushed for his old comrade Peter Mandelson to be made ambassador to Washington at all costs. It turns out, in the McSweeney version, that not only was Lord Mandelson not his “mentor”, but a mere adviser, and that he too had been betrayed by him, not told the truth about the Epstein connection, and taken for a fool. He took responsibility for the blunder and resigned, but he was also careful enough to make clear that it was, of course, the prime minister’s decision to give him the job… Et tu, McSweeney?

Wednesday’s Prime Minister’s Questions will be the last before Parliament is suspended, or “prorogued”, ahead of the start of a new session on May 13.

The weekly grilling is likely to see Sir Keir face further questions from the Conservatives about Lord Peter Mandelson, following a day when Labour MPs were whipped to oppose a Tory motion calling for the prime minister to be investigated over his insistence that due process was followed in the peer’s appointment as ambassador to the US.

The motion from Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch would have seen Sir Keir referred to the Commons Privileges Committee in an echo of the process that eventually ended Boris Johnson’s political career.

Mrs Badenoch has accused the Prime Minister of misleading the Commons when he claimed due process was followed and no pressure was exerted to grant Lord Mandelson security clearance against official advice.

But despite a rebellion by 15 backbenchers, Labour MPs voted decisively against launching an investigation by a majority of 112 – slightly less than the Government’s working majority of 165.

Following the vote, Mrs Badenoch accused Labour MPs of being complicit in a “cover-up”, saying they would “rue the day” they voted against an inquiry.

Housing secretary Steve Reed has dismissed suggestions that Labour colleagues will be accused of a cover-up over the Lord Mandelson vetting row, after defeating a bid to launch an inquiry into claims the prime minister misled Parliament over the scandal.

Asked whether he was bothered by a claim from the back benches that the party would face smears about a “cover-up” if MPs were whipped to reject a call for a parliamentary investigation into Sir Keir Starmer’s remarks to Parliament, Mr Reed told Times Radio: “No, because there’s more scrutiny on this issue than almost any issue I can think of.”

Asked whether the 15 Labour MPs who voted in favour of the Commons motion on Tuesday would lose the whip, he said: “There was a handful of usual suspects who did what they tend to do. I’m not in charge of discipline, I’m not too bothered about them to be honest.”

Labour backbenchers who “don’t play the team game with the rest of us” are “not going to distract” the government, the housing secretary has insisted, refusing to say whether MPs who rebelled in Tuesday’s Commons vote would lose the whip, or whether he would support that move.

Steve Reed told Sky News: “You’ve got a handful of usual suspects that will repeatedly vote against the Government. They’re not going to distract us.

“You know, we’ve got the renters’ rights reforms coming in this Friday, which gives renters, people who rent their home, the biggest increase in protections and rights that we’ve had for a generation.

“That is what voters want us to focus on, not a handful of people that go off and don’t play the team game with the rest of us.

Ninety-nine percent of us are united with the Prime Minister so that we can focus on the issues that matter.”

Sir Keir Starmer has reportedly offered Rayner a spot back in the Cabinet as part of a planned reshuffle following what is expected to be a disastrous set of results at the local elections.

What might previously have been seen as a gamble (the former deputy PM was, for a while, seen as somewhat of a liability as a result of her chequered tax affairs) is now a last ditch attempt to save himself at a time of maximum peril for the beleaguered prime minister.

Rayner is widely perceived to be one of the main options to replace Starmer, alongside Wes Streeting (and maybe even Ed Miliband). She is deeply respected within Labour, especially among the left wing MPs who are such a thorn in Starmer’s side. If the PM could persuade his former deputy to return to Cabinet, not only could it shore up his position with the left, it would also signal a vote of confidence and loyalty to Starmer’s ailing government from Rayner.

But it will be hard to persuade her to return to what is widely seen to be a sinking ship. And even if he does manage it, the ship may continue to sink anyway.