Keir Starmer is reportedly preparing to offer Sadiq Khan a peerage after the upcoming local elections, according to the Financial Times. The move is being widely interpreted as an attempt to secure Khan’s loyalty, at a moment when Labour is bracing for a difficult set of results.
These are the same local elections in which Labour insiders expect a walloping, making the timing all the more politically sensitive. Rather than projecting confidence, the reported plan risks reinforcing the perception of a leadership seeking to steady internal divisions.
Starmer has already appointed more peers than his last four predecessors, prompting criticism about the scale of honours being handed out. Now, reports suggest he may go further, with talk not only of a seat in the House of Lords, but even a possible Cabinet role for Khan.
For Khan, however, the offer presents a serious and potentially damaging contradiction.
In December 2022, during a London Assembly session, he stated clearly that “we should abolish the House of Lords.” That was not a vague call for reform, nor a cautious political line, but a direct statement that the institution itself should go.
If he now accepts a life peerage, he would be taking a seat in the very chamber he argued should not exist.
The accusation of hypocrisy would be hard to avoid.
Supporters may argue that working within the system allows for change, or that political positions evolve over time. Yet accepting a peerage is not a step toward abolition, it is participation in the system at its highest level, with all the status and privilege that entails.
There is also a clear political calculation behind the move. A peerage, particularly if paired with a Cabinet role, would remove Khan from frontline electoral politics and place him in a different arena altogether. It would also take him out of contention for any future Labour leadership contest, neatly eliminating a potential rival.
Seen in that light, the offer looks less like an honour and more like a strategic manoeuvre.
Khan now faces a choice that will define how his previous words are judged. He can refuse the peerage and remain consistent with his stated position, or he can accept it and invite criticism that principle has been set aside for advancement.
At a time when Labour is already under pressure, that is a test neither he nor his party can easily afford to mishandle.
