Explain partygate, ethics chief tells PM
Lord Geidt says questions must be answered over potential breach of ministerial code
BORIS JOHNSON’S own ethics adviser yesterday demanded an explanation from the Prime Minister over partygate, as he said there were “legitimate” questions about whether he broke the ministerial code.
Lord Geidt also indicated he had considered resigning, because he feared that if he asked Mr Johnson for permission to investigate the matter the proposal would be rejected.
The development heaps further pressure on an embattled Mr Johnson, as the number of Conservative MPS publicly calling on him to quit hit 30. Lord Geidt’s intervention may persuade others to withdraw their support.
No10 is preparing a fightback, however. The Daily Telegraph can reveal details of an economy-focused drive being planned for the weeks after the Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
It comes as it emerged that Sir Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner have been issued with police questionnaires over their involvement in the “beergate” gathering.
Lord Geidt’s comments were made in the foreword to his annual report.
In it, he makes clear he believes that the question of whether the ministerial code was breached by Mr Johnson having been fined for breaking lockdown laws is “legitimate”.
Lord Geidt, who is the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests, wrote: “In the case of the fixed penalty notice recently issued to and paid by the Prime Minister, a legitimate question has arisen as to whether those facts alone might have constituted a breach of the overarching duty within the ministerial code of complying with the law.”
The Prime Minister faces a privileges committee inquiry into whether he intentionally misled Parliament over partygate. If the committee concludes he did, a resignation would be expected.
However, the flow of calls from Conservatives urging Mr Johnson to quit regardless continued yesterday, with John Stevenson, the Tory MP for Carlisle, the latest to put in a letter that could trigger a leadership vote.
Andrea Leadsom, Mr Johnson’s pro
Brexit former business secretary, said there had been “unacceptable failings of leadership” over illegal parties in Downing Street – but fell short of calling for a resignation.
Meanwhile, Lord Hague, the former Tory leader, predicted that the tally of 54 no confidence letters that would trigger an automatic leadership vote would be reached this month.
The Telegraph can reveal details of Downing Street’s plan to try to stabilise Mr Johnson’s premiership with a renewed focus on the economy.
A return to Covid-style regular press conferences, but about the country’s finances, is being considered, in what is being referred to as putting the Government on an “economic war footing”.
Public briefings held as often as every week could take place from Downing Street, led by Mr Johnson or other ministers, with economic advisers by their side discussing the latest data. It would be an attempt to explain what is being done to tackle the cost of living crisis – the top issue of concern for the public according to polls.
“The idea is to go on to a Covid-esque war-footing on the economy. It is not a speech, it is not a moment. It is a relentless focus on the economy,” said a senior government source.
Lord Geidt’s intervention emerged yesterday. In his report, the peer indicated that he considered standing down, noting that if he asked Mr Johnson if he could investigate the matter and was rebuffed he would have to resign.
Lord Geidt said: “If a Prime Minister’s judgment is that there is nothing to investigate or no case to answer, he would be bound to reject any such advice, thus forcing the resignation of the Independent Adviser.”
Claims that Lord Geidt had been on the brink of a resignation and had to be talked down were denied by Downing Street last night.
Mr Johnson, in a letter of reply released yesterday, said he had taken “full responsibility for everything that took place on my watch” in light of lockdown-busting gatherings in No10 and denied he broke the ministerial code.
The most startling aspect of the Tory rebellion is that it touches almost every aspect of the parliamentary party. Analysis by The Daily Telegraph of the 30 MPS calling for the Prime Minister to resign or who have admitted putting in a no confidence letter shows that at least one rebel can be found in every election intake of the past four decades, with the exception of the 2017 vote – a sign of how critics are spread across the generations.
The Brexit division also seems not to be a major factor. The rebels count 17
Leave-supporters and 13 Remainers. Nor does the size of the majority seem to be an obvious indication of rebellion. Some MPS facing tight re-elections have flipped on the Prime Minister. Three MPS who went public won their last races by less than 1,000 votes.
But others do not fit that bill. Eight of the rebels have a majority of more than 20,000. There are two ways to interpret the spread of dissatisfaction and its implications for Boris Johnson. The first is painful. Critics are emerging across the electoral map, both in Blue Wall Tory shires and Red Wall ex-labour strongholds. If just one cohort of Tory MPS were disgruntled – say, those demanding lower tax – there would be a more obvious policy solution to ease the political pressure: cut tax. But when differing groups with competing demands are joining the rebellion, a policy solution is less obvious. And worse, the common political thread through all the Tory rebels is that the political failings at the top are such that they can’t be solved in any other way than the Prime Minister going.
But there is a more generous interpretation. In 2019, when Theresa May was toppled by MPS, there was a clear group that was determined to oust her – the ardent Brexiteers.
This time round, according to scores of critics who have talked to The Telegraph, there is no central organising group pulling the strings.
The fact there is no single faction – and critically, no single potential successor – agitating for a resignation could end up helping Mr Johnson survive the putsch. Do rebels want a soft, moderate Tory like Jeremy Hunt to be the next leader? Or a grass roots’ favourite like Liz Truss? Or the financial brain of Rishi Sunak?
The rebels themselves do not know – which, for now at least, is helping the Prime Minister remain in place.
It is notable, too, that there have been few resignations from the ministerial ranks. Crucially, nobody in the Cabinet has publicly wobbled on Mr Johnson since the Sue Gray report. The fact the government “payroll” – those being paid for roles in government – are yet to publicly rebel en masse is some cause for comfort in No10. James Johnson, who ran polling for Theresa May’s Downing Street, said: “The broad range of critical MPS makes sense when looking at public opinion – where hostility towards Mr Johnson is also broad, reflecting the acute dangers that MPS feel when looking at their own seats.
“In a poll conducted by Savanta Comres, a majority in all regions of the UK want him to resign, and more want him to resign than stay in post across all social classes and age groups.
“Some have convinced themselves that Johnson remains popular in the so-called ‘Red Wall’. But his approval rating is in deep negative territory there too. And, though Leave voters are keener on the PM than Remain voters, more still want him to resign by a margin of 50 per cent to 41 per cent.”