Tory MPs backing need to pick new ethics chief

Conservative MPs have insisted Prime Minister Boris Johnson must replace his ethics chief speedily, amid Labour claims “more rule-breaking is inevitable”.

Labour want to grant a parliamentary committee the right to initiate its own investigations into potential breaches of the ministerial code, led by a new specialist adviser, if Lord Geidt is not replaced as ministerial interests adviser within two months.

Sir Jeremy Wright and Robert Buckland were among those Tory MPs to back the need for Lord Geidt to be replaced, although they raised questions over whether Labour’s alternative proposal would work.

Lord Geidt said he had been narrowly clinging on in his role over partygate, but ultimately quit after being forced into an “impossible and odious” position by the prime minister over steel tariffs.

Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner told the Commons: “It wasn’t about steel at all, it was about this prime minister’s casual and constant disregard for the rules. Lord Geidt couldn’t stomach it any longer, and I don’t blame him. To this prime minister, ethics is a county east of London – the truth is, the prime minister behaves as though it’s one rule for him and another for the rest of us.”

Ms Rayner said a “huge backlog of sleaze and misconduct” was created in the five-month period it took to appoint Lord Geidt to replace Mr Johnson’s previous ethics adviser, adding: “This House should not tolerate a repeat performance. We can’t endure another five months with no accountability in Downing Street. Since Lord Geidt resigned, the government has refused to confirm if or how his investigation will continue.”

Downing Street has said it accepts the ethics chief fulfils a “vitally important” function advising on the ministerial code, but said the PM was reviewing the position and could abolish it. Ms Rayner said: “Under this government, more rule-breaking is just inevitable unfortunately.”

Conservative former attorney general Sir Jeremy, intervening, said: “I happen to agree with her there should not be a long gap before appointment of

a new independent adviser.”

But Sir Jeremy said the ministerial code “must remain the property of the PM”, adding: “It makes sense the adviser should give advice to the PM and not to a committee of Parliament.”

Conservative ex-minister Mr Buckland said: “I agree with her about the need to appoint a new adviser but

I’ve looked carefully at her motion and it talks about an adviser.

“What would the status of that adviser to the committee be? Would they be an employee of this House? If they are an officer of this House, there’s an obvious conflict between their duty to Parliament and any involvement they might have in government affairs”

Sir Jeremy Wright, left, and Robert Buckland.