Boris Johnson CLEARED of breaking the ministerial code over Wallpapergate

The government’s new standards adviser today slammed ‘significant failings’ over the £90,000 No11 flat refurbishment – but cleared Boris Johnson of breaking the ministerial code.

Lord Geidt criticised the handling of a planned trust to fund the overhaul of the grace and favour flat where the PM lives with fiancee Carrie and their son Wilf, saying it was not subject to ‘rigorous project management by officials’. 

He also painted a picture of Mr Johnson not being engaged with what was happening on the project, suggesting he had little clue how it was being funded and was ‘unwise’ not to keep closer control.  

In a long-awaited report to accompany the latest register of interests, the peer said the civil service should have been across the detail of the plans.

‘Given the level of the Prime Minister’s expectations for the Trust to deliver on the objects he had set, this was a significant failing,’ Lord Geidt wrote. 

‘Instead, the Prime Minister – unwisely, in my view – allowed the refurbishment of the apartment at No 11 Downing Street to proceed without more rigorous regard for how this would be funded.’

However, the adviser on ministerial interests said the trust was a ‘genuine endeavour’.

Ordering a note to be added to the latest register, he said that the financial arrangements ‘present no actual or perceived conflict’.

‘I consider them to be consistent with the provisions of the Ministerial Code,’ he added. 

The relatively mild findings will be a relief to Mr Johnson and his aides, after the long-running saga over the lavish refurb. However, separate probes by the Electoral Commission and standards commissioner are ongoing.

And Mr Johnson has ended up personally footing a large bill, amid persistent – but hotly disputed – rumours about his finances being under strain.  

No10 stressed that Mr Johnson has now paid for the No11 works himself beyond the £30,000 annual allowance for upkeep from the taxpayer and had always tried to ‘minimise the costs’ for the public.

A Downing Street spokesman said: ‘Lord Geidt’s independent report shows the Prime Minister acted in accordance with the Ministerial Code at all times.

‘The Prime Minister has made a declaration in his List of Ministerial Interests, as advised by Lord Geidt.

‘Cabinet Office officials were engaged and informed throughout and official advice was followed.

‘Other than works funded through the annual allowance, the costs of the wider refurbishment of the flat are not being financed by taxpayers and have been settled by the Prime Minister personally.’

The row was sparked by a string of revelations in the Mail over the £58,000 cost overrun being originally paid by the Conservative Party before being covered by Tory donor Lord Brownlow. 

PMs have an annual allowance for improvements to their residence, and sources told MailOnline that the £30,000 available for 2020-21 was the only public funding used for the refurb. 

Lord Geidt – former private secretary to the Queen – was appointed at the end of last month and immediately handed the task of ‘ascertaining the facts’ surrounding the renovation of the 11 Downing Street flat and advising Mr Johnson ‘on any further registration of interests that may be needed’. 

The post had been vacant since Sir Alex Allan resigned in November in response to Mr Johnson standing by Priti Patel, despite an investigation finding the Home Secretary’s conduct ‘amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying’.

Lord Geidt found the PM knew ‘nothing about’ payments for the refurbishment work until reports in the media surfaced.

He said: ‘I have also spoken … to the Prime Minister who confirms that he knew nothing about such payments (made by Tory donor Lord Brownlow) until immediately prior to media reports in February 2021.

‘At that point, the Prime Minister immediately sought the necessary advice about his interests and, as a consequence, settled the full amount himself on March 8 2021.’

The peer said discussions about a Downing Street Trust being set up to pay for the work had been held, but legal advice received in June 2020 ‘raised doubts’ about whether such a body ‘would be capable of dealing with costs associated with the private residences’.

‘By the late autumn of 2020, it was apparent that a trust capable of meeting the original objects (including the costs of refurbishing the No 11 Downing Street residence) was still likely to be many months off,’ the adviser said.

‘On October 20 2020, Lord Brownlow confirmed to Cabinet Office officials, including by subsequently ensuring that the minutes properly recorded the fact, that he had the day before settled an invoice for the No 11 Downing Street residence refurbishment works directly with the supplier.

‘Cabinet Office officials appear not to have acted on this information to the extent of informing the Prime Minister, let alone offering him advice on his private interests.

‘Moreover, despite the Prime Minister and Lord Brownlow having some limited contact during the following three months, the record shows no evidence that the Prime Minister had been informed by Lord Brownlow that he had personally settled the total costs.’

The 10-page report concluded there was ‘no conflict’ even though an interest did arise for Mr Johnson.

‘In respect of the interests arising as a result of these events, I advise that an interest did arise in his capacity as a Minister of the Crown,’ he said.

‘This is as a result of the support provided by Conservative campaign headquarters and by Lord Brownlow to the Prime Minister.

‘I have considered the nature of that support and am content that no conflict (or reasonably perceived conflict) arises as a result of these interests.

‘These interests have been properly declared to me by the Prime Minister.’

He said Cabinet Secretary Simon Case had, as part of the review, acknowledged the ‘shortcomings relating to project management and the failure to advise the Prime Minister of the situation in October 2020’ in respect to the upgrade works on the No 11 flat.

The Electoral Commission has launched a separate probe into whether the Conservative Party might have broken electoral law over its part in the funding arrangements.  

Labour MPs have also asked the parliamentary commissioner for standards to look into the issues raised and whether any rules been broken.

Mr Johnson has previously been warned by the Commons standards committee for failing to declare interests.

In 2019, after he made public apologies, he was told he would face a more ‘serious sanction’ if he breached the rules again. That could potentially mean a recommendation of suspension, although it would need to be approved by the whole House.  

Matt Hancock gets a slap on the wrist from watchdog for ‘minor’ breach of the Ministerial Code by failing to declare he owned shares in a family firm which won NHS contracts while he was Health Secretary 

Matt Hancock was let off by the standards watchdog today for failing to reveal he owned shares in a family first that won NHS contracts.

The Health Secretary was accused of cronyism after it he revealed in March he had a 20 per cent stake in Topwood Ltd, which is run by his sister and brother-in-law.

The company, which specialises in the secure storage, shredding and scanning of documents, was awarded £300,000 of business by NHS Wales this year.

The new ministerial standards watchdog Lord Geidt today said that his failure to mention the shareholding before it won an NHS deal was a ‘minor’ breach of the Ministerial Code, but ruled that no action should be taken. 

The company was handed a ‘framework agreement’ with NHS Shared Business Services Ltd (SBS), which outsources NHS back-office work, in February 2019, which allowed it to win the Welsh contract this year.

But Mr Hancock became Health Secretary in July 2018 after Jeremy Hunt replaced Mr Johnson as Foreign Secretary, following the latter’s resignation.

Lord Geidt  said today that ‘it is reasonable to assume that Mr Hancock’s sister and brother-in-law, the owners of Topwood Ltd, would have been well aware of his appointment as Secretary of State at the time of their company securing this contract with NHS SBS.’

After the situation was highlighted by the Health Service Journal earlier this year, sources insisted Mr Hancock had discussed the issue with the Department for Heath and Social Care permanent secretary before accepting the shares, and was told that any conflicts could be handled if they arise.

The Health Secretary is said to have no ‘active participation’ in the running of the company, and was not involved in awarding contracts.

Lord Geidt said today: ‘Given that Topwood Ltd had secured the award of a framework contract with NHS SBS, a company in which the legal personality of the Secretary of State is a shareholder, I believe there to be a danger that a reasonable person might perceive this link to represent a conflict of interest, and that it should have been declared at the time.

‘In reaching this determination, I accept that the scale of NHS operations in England (for which the Secretary of State is responsible) are broad and that the activity of NHS SBS may have been very far from the Secretary of State’s main focus.

‘I assess this earlier failure to declare the interest was as a result of his lack of knowledge and in no way deliberate, and therefore, in technical terms, a minor breach of the Ministerial Code. 

‘I have advised the Prime Minister accordingly. In coming to this finding, I recognise that Mr Hancock has acted with integrity throughout and that this event should in no way impugn his good character or ministerial record.’