Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateSean Woodcock
Main Page: Sean Woodcock (Labour - Banbury)Department Debates - View all Sean Woodcock's debates with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Barros-Curtis
I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman’s patronising tone, but I will simply say that I do not need to be told how to vote on this motion, because I do not believe that the case has been made out, as I will explain now, if I can make some progress.
I underline my point by reiterating what the Speaker said earlier, and what I said to him when he was in the Chair: of course, the question we are considering is not about the application that was put before him. He has rightly made a decision, as he was required to once the application came before him, but I am clear that those who submitted that application to him were engaged in a nakedly political stunt. That is not just because of the nature of the motion before us, but because of the shapeshifting of the Opposition party leaders on this issue since The Guardian broke the story on 16 April.
Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. Is it not the reality that this is about a Leader of the Opposition who called for us to join the US in the war in Iran, and who called the Prime Minister a liar when the evidence has shown that there is absolutely no basis for it? Is this not just the Leader of the Opposition once again shooting from the hip?
Mr Barros-Curtis
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. Even if his intervention was perhaps slightly askew from the point I am about to make, it goes to the question of consistency on this issue and many others.
As I said, the Opposition party leaders have been shapeshifting on this issue. The Leader of the Opposition and the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), rather than waiting for the evidence, had already made up their minds two weeks ago. On 17 April, the day after the story broke in The Guardian, the Lib Dems put out a press release stating that
“Starmer must be investigated by Privileges Committee over…the decision to overrule Mandelson’s failed security vetting”,
but that was found wanting, because the evidence showed otherwise. That was proven when the Prime Minister came to the Chamber at the earliest opportunity, on Monday 20 April, and laid the evidence before this House. Sir Olly Robbins backed that up in his evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 21 April.