Playing both sides Labour accused of hypocrisy over stance on steel deal

Labour has been accused of “two-faced” hypocrisy over its stance on the steel deal at the heart of Lord Geidt’s resignation.

Angela Rayner, the deputy Labour leader, yesterday said Boris Johnson’s ethics adviser walked out because the Prime Minister “made a mockery of the ministerial code”.

It is understood the resignation came over Mr Johnson’s plans to keep tariffs on foreign imported steel to protect UK firms, which the Labour Party backed in the Commons the previous day.

His resignation letter said that he thought the policy, which Mr Johnson admitted “might be seen to conflict with our obligations” in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), would break the code.

“This Prime Minister has, in his own adviser’s words, made a mockery of the ministerial code,” Ms Rayner said.

Labour has been accused of hypocrisy for backing the resignation over the steel policy it supported.

A Whitehall

source told The Daily Telegraph: “Labour’s position is highly hypocritical. Bill Esterson stated in black and white that there should be emergency legislation, and that they would support it. This two-faced approach won’t work.”

Last June, the Trade Remedies Authority advised that the UK cut its foreign steel tariffs in half as there was no “legal basis” for extending them. It gave No10 until the end of this month to respond. Bill Esterson, Labour’s trade minister, called for emergency legislation to keep the tariffs when the cut was proposed.

Mr Johnson, in his reply to Lord Geidt’s letter, said he consulted him to seek advice on “the national interest in protecting a crucial industry”.

He added: “This has in the past had cross-party support. It would be in line with our domestic law but might be seen to conflict with our obligations under the WTO.” Mason Boycott-owen