Barry Gardiner, one of Keir Starmer’s most vocal critics on the Labour backbenches, has leapt to the prime minister’s defence over the Peter Mandelson vetting controversy.
Starmer has once again become embroiled in a row relating to Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador after the Guardian reported on Thursday that Mandelson failed his security vetting to be appointed to the post.
It has been reported that the Foreign Office did not tell the PM that Mandelson failed the vetting, with Starmer only being made aware on Tuesday this week.
The Foreign Office’s most senior civil servant Olly Robbins has since been sacked by Starmer as a result.
However, opposition parties, and some within the Labour Party, are questioning how Starmer and his office could possibly not have known about the vetting.
READ NEXT: Labour see huge eight-point swing in another disaster poll for Reform
Starmer has previously told parliament that “due process” was followed, prompting accusations that he misled parliament over the affair and should step down as a result.
Others believe Starmer has done nothing wrong if he wasn’t made aware of the failed vetting and have defended the PM.
This includes Labour MP Barry Gardiner, an MP who has previously been highly critical of Starmer’s leadership.
But during an appearance on Newsnight, he said his disagreements with Starmer had only ever been about matters of policy.
“I won’t try to manufacture a reason to get somebody out when they’ve acted in good faith,” he said.
“I do not think Keir Starmer lied to parliament.”
On this occasion, Gardiner said, Starmer should not have to resign or face a leadership challenge as he has been let down by his senior civil servants.
In an impassioned defence of Starmer, he said: “There are people that would love to get Keir Starmer out of Downing Street. They are in the other parties, some of them are in the Labour Party as well.
“This is not the thing to do it over! As far as I can see, he acted in good faith, he may have been lied to.”
Gardiner said Starmer “has the right to trust his most senior civil servants, he has the right to trust them and to feel that they are giving him full information.”
He added: “But the real question is what the hell did the civil service think they were playing at?”