Keir Starmer has rejected claims he has watered down promises to introduce a law giving MPs a vote before military intervention and to stop selling weapons to Saudi Arabia.
During his party’s 2020 leadership race, the Labour leader promised to introduce a “prevention of military intervention act” that would stop “more illegal wars” and ensure military action could only be taken if a lawful case was made, the Commons had given its consent and there was “a viable objective”.
Starmer has backed the RAF strikes in Yemen with the US, which were authorised by Rishi Sunak without giving parliamentarians a say, but he insisted on Sunday there was “no inconsistency” between the two positions.
The Labour leader said he stood by the principle that military action should be put to parliament. “There is obviously a huge distinction between an operation, the like of which we have seen in the last few days, and military action, a sustained campaign, military action usually involving troops on the ground,” he said.
Asked if his plan to give the Commons a say related only to sending in ground forces, he said: “Yes, because what I said when I made that pledge was that what I want to do was to codify the convention.”
Starmer hinted the requirement for MPs to have a say may not need to be put in law. “I want to codify that – it could be by a law, it could be by some other means,” he said. “I’m not ruling out law.”
Rejecting suggestions his move could anger the party’s leftwing, Starmer added: “No Labour activist has ever said to me ‘if urgent action is needed we should stop that in order for parliament to be convened’.”
Before becoming Labour leader in 2020, Starmer said the UK “should stop the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia” over concerns about their use in Yemen’s civil war.
He told the BBC he was still committed to reviewing all arms sales, but he refused to be definitive when it came to the Saudis. “We will review the situation and the review will give us the answers to those questions.”
The Conservatives accused Starmer of not being able to say “what he’d do differently” as he “just snipes from the sidelines”.
Rejecting wider claims that he frequently changes his mind and contradicts his values and ideas, Starmer said: “Labour party members are predominantly, overwhelmingly, behind what we’ve done with and to the party, to change the party. Four years ago, we were picking ourselves up, bruised, from a terrible election result …
“We have ruthlessly changed the Labour party, put ourselves in a position where it can credibly contend in the election this year, and the overwhelming majority of Labour party members and supporters are delighted.”
Starmer also defended taking a private jet paid for by Qatar to visit the country’s leader, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, to discuss the hostage situation in Gaza, despite Labour criticising Sunak’s “private jet habit”.
The Labour leader argued on Sunday there was a clear “distinction” between flying around England when trains could be used and using such trips to hold key talks with foreign leaders.
According to parliamentary records, Starmer used the Qatari-provided jet to travel between the Cop28 climate conference and Doha, where he met the Emir of Qatar with three members of staff. The trip would have cost Qatar more than £25,000.
“I think there’s a distinction, most people will understand, between flying in the circumstances I’ve just described and using private jets to jet around England when trains will get you there nearly as quickly,” he told the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg.
“The long and the short of it was in Dubai I was having a number of discussions with international leaders about climate change as you would expect, but of course I was having a nearly equal number about the conflict in the Middle East – how do we have a sustainable path to that ceasefire?”
Starmer was also questioned for accepting the free flight to Qatar when he said previously he would not watch England in the World Cup there because of concerns about the Gulf state’s human rights record.
