Fears Boris Johnson could fall foul of ‘Tory paper trail’ over flat refurb

968

View
comments

Boris Johnson today claimed being portrayed as a snob about John Lewis was his main regret about the huge furore over his lavish Downing Street flat refurb.  

The PM insisted the worst thing about the ‘farrago of nonsense’ – which includes an investigation by the elections watchdog into whether the law has been broken – was the misrepresentation of his views about the store chain. 

‘I love John Lewis!’ he told reporters on a visit to a school in London, saying he had nothing to ‘worry about’. 

The controversial overhaul is said to have been sparked because his fiancee Carrie Symonds could not stand the ‘John Lewis nightmare’ decor left by Theresa May.  

The jokey response came amid Downing Street fears that Tory paper trail could leave Mr Johnson exposed over the murky funding of his grace-and-favour residence.

The PM and Ms Symonds face handing over emails and phone messages relating to the controversial makeover for their No11 residence after the elections watchdog dramatically announced an investigation.

They could also be interviewed – along with former chief aide Dominic Cummings – as part of the Electoral Commission probe into whether donations to foot the costs were illegally kept secret. 

But although the inquiry is currently targeted at the Conservative Party rather than Mr Johnson himself, concerns have been voiced that its records could lead back to the premier.

‘The worry is that there could be a paper trail,’ a government source told the Times. ‘There was a very limited number of people who knew about the funding arrangements at CCHQ. It’s not clear how this will end.’

Mr Johnson said this afternoon that he would comply with ‘whatever’ the Electoral Commission want, but he added: ‘I don’t think there’s anything to see here.’ 

In a bombshell move yesterday, the Electoral Commission said it had carried out an initial assessment and was ‘satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred’.

It has sweeping powers to demand documents and interview witnesses under caution. Failure to comply or tell the truth is a criminal offence.

No serving prime minister has ever been interviewed under caution in relation to an alleged breach of the law.

Mr Cummings, who is now in a state of war with Mr Johnson, claimed in a blog last week that he had warned the PM the ‘plans to have donors secretly pay for the renovation were unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations’.

He sparked alarm for Mr Johnson’s allies by saying he would be ‘happy’ to tell the Electoral Commission what he knows.  

PMs have a £30,000 annual allowance for improvements to their residence, although it can be rolled over to some extent from year to year.

Mr Johnson repeatedly dodged yesterday when asked whether the extra costs of the work – believed to be £58,000 – was initially paid from Tory funds, merely insisting he had now footed the bill.

The premier insisted today that newly-appointed ministerial standards adviser Lord Geidt will do an ‘outstanding job’ in his separate review into whether the refurbishments were properly handled.

However, Labour has said the adviser’s powers are too weak because the PM remains the ‘ultimate arbiter’ of the code, meaning he ‘effectively marks his own homework’.

Sir Keir Starmer moved to turn up the heat today, saying on a visit to Manchester: ‘If there’s an innocent explanation, the easiest thing is to set up a camera pool and take the question and answer it.

‘The Prime Minister should do that this morning, then we can move on and concentrate on things that matter most to people, which is their jobs, particularly in the autumn when a lot of people are coming off furlough, what’s happening on the NHS and what we are doing about the fact that the rate of crime is going up across the country.’

He also said the planned investigation into the matter by Lord Geidt was inadequate.

Mr Starmer said: ‘The idea of having an adviser who can investigate only if the Prime Minister says so just shows how weak the system is.

‘That’s why what we are proposing is that we clean up Westminster. We have a proper, independent commission.’

Earlier, vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi again insisted the PM had not broken the ministerial code, adding that he had been ‘advised by officials’ throughout and would follow the conclusions of his newly appointed standards adviser Lord Geidt.

‘The prime minister has answered umpteen questions, including saying that if the Lord Geidt finds that the prime minister needs to make other declarations, he will then make those,’ Mr Zahawi said. 

‘But he has throughout this whole process been advised by his officials, and he has clearly paid for the refurbishment.’ 

The inquiry follows a string of revelations in the Mail suggesting a £58,000 cost overrun may have been paid originally by the Conservative Party before being covered by Tory donor Lord Brownlow.

Mr Johnson angrily told MPs yesterday that he had settled the bill with his own money. 

But he ducked repeated questions about who originally paid out when the work at 11, Downing Street was completed last year. Failure to declare donations is an offence under electoral law, punishable by fines of up to £20,000.

The Electoral Commission can pass on investigations to the police if it uncovers evidence of criminal offences or believes its efforts are being frustrated.

Downing Street yesterday said Mr Johnson was willing to co-operate fully with the inquiry, which could demand to see relevant emails and WhatsApp messages. His fiancée Ms Symonds, who masterminded the costly redecoration, could also face questions.

Asked if Mr Johnson was willing to be questioned in person, his press secretary said the commission’s investigation was a matter for the Conservative Party, and the Prime Minister ‘will of course be happy to assist if asked’.

More details has emerged of the efforts to set up a charitable trust that could support upkeep of the Downing Street buildings. 

Labour peer Baroness Jay told BBC Newsnight that she had been approached earlier this year by Lord Brownlow, who ‘asked if I would like to become a trustee on the Downing Street Trust’.

She said that the proposed trust ‘would be for the public part of Downing Street not the residences’, although nothing formal was ever agreed.

Tory MPs were aghast at the row, which comes when the Government is facing sleaze allegations over lobbying and procurement deals and only a week from a major round of local elections.

‘It is a stupid self-inflicted wound that makes us look shifty and out of touch,’ one former minister told the Mail.

‘If it had been dealt with straight away then people would have thought nothing of it. But the attempt to cover up what happened looks dodgy.’

Another veteran Tory said: ‘I genuinely think we are in trouble. You can argue that none of the things add up to much on their own. But there is a carelessness and arrogance in No 10 that is very dangerous.’

There was also resentment in some quarters toward Ms Symonds, with the PM’s fiancée dubbed ‘Carrie Antoinette’ on Tory WhatsApp groups over her allegedly expensive tastes.

But there was also anger at the Electoral Commission over the timing of the announcement, which came less than an hour before Mr Johnson was due to answer questions in the Commons.

Mr Johnson appeared rattled in the chamber after Sir Keir Starmer accused him of ‘major sleaze’.

Jabbing his finger at the Labour leader, he said he was ‘playing political games, whereas this party gets on with delivering on the people’s priorities’. He insisted no laws or rules had been broken, adding that he had ‘met the requirements that I have been obliged to meet in full’.

Downing Street said Mr Johnson had not received any requests for information from the commission.

But David Howarth, a former commissioner at the elections watchdog, said it was ‘inconceivable’ that his conduct would not be looked at along with that of the Conservative Party.

The Cambridge law professor said: ‘The investigators will look at every single transaction relating to payment for the works on the flat with a view to finding out whether reportable donations have been reported in time. The question is, who paid the bill and was it reported?’

Prime ministers can spend up to £30,000 a year of public money on their private residence. But the makeover bill came in much higher, prompting Mr Johnson to order a search to find someone to pay for the £58,000 excess. He was forced to pay himself – after various parties are all said to have funded the work at some point.