Starmer accused of breaking Commons rules over relationship with McSweeney and Labour Together donations

Sir Keir Starmer was tonight accused of breaking Commons rules over his relationship with controversial chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, as Conservative MPs alleged he may have breached the MPs' code by failing to declare past support from Labour Together, the think-tank closely tied to his leadership bid.

Conservatives said Starmer did not declare any support from Labour Together in the official Commons register, even though the think-tank is linked to McSweeney and is said to have raised more than £700,000 in donations that helped Labour's campaign. The issue centers on whether such support should have been disclosed to Parliament under the MPs' code of conduct.

Downing Street did not respond to questions about McSweeney's time at Labour Together, but a Prime Minister's spokesman said Starmer had 'full confidence' in his chief of staff. Tory chairman Kevin Hollinrake urged the Government to 'come clean' about the support Starmer received during Labour's leadership contest and why it has not been properly declared.

Labour Together has boasted about helping rally the party membership behind Starmer in 2020 after Labour's defeat the previous year. A 2024 book by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund detailed the think-tank's role, including access to polling data worth hundreds of thousands of pounds used to aid Starmer's leadership bid. The Electoral Commission fined Labour Together £14,250 in September 2021 for more than 20 breaches involving the £700,000 in undeclared donations, which the regulator attributed to 'human error'. A Labour Together spokesman said the group cooperated with the probe and that McSweeney subsequently left the organisation. The Conservatives have asked the Electoral Commission to reopen the investigation and refer it to the police.

The situation underscores ongoing questions about transparency in political fundraising, including the threshold—set at £1,500—that requires MPs to declare support designed to help their candidacy in elections, whether parliamentary or non-parliamentary. The case highlights the broader scrutiny surrounding Starmer's leadership team and the fundraising links that supporters and opponents say are crucial to understanding how his rise to leadership was facilitated.