Boris Johnson’s independent ethics adviser has suggested that the prime minister may have breached the ministerial code when he was fined for breaking lockdown rules. In his annual report on ministers’ interests, Christopher Geidt said that if Mr Johnson did not believe he had breached the code he should explain his position publicly.
“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,” he wrote.
“It may be that the prime minister considers that no such breach of his ministerial code has occurred. In that case, I believe a prime minister should respond accordingly, setting out his case in public.”
In a letter to Lord Geidt on Tuesday night, Mr Johnson said paying a fine was not a criminal conviction and that he did not believe he had broken the ministerial code.
“I did not consider that the circumstances in which I received a fixed penalty notice were contrary to the regulations. I have accepted the outcome and paid it in compliance with legal requirements,” he said.
“In coming to that conclusion, I have duly considered past precedents of ministers who have unwittingly breached regulations where there was no intent to break the law; I have been fully accountable to parliament and the British people and rightly apologised for the mistake; I have corrected the parliamentary record in relation to past statements; and I have followed the principles of leadership and accountability in doing so,” he says.
The prime minister’s exchange with Lord Geidt came as more Conservative MPs called for Mr Johnson’s resignation amid mounting expectations that a vote of no confidence in his leadership could come as early as next week.
John Stevenson, the Conservative MP for Carlisle since 2010, said he had been deeply disappointed by revelations in Sue Gray’s report last week about lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street. He said he had submitted a letter to 1922 Committee chairman Graham Brady calling for a confidence vote.
“The continuing criticism, revelations and questions are debilitating for the government at a time when there are so many other important and critical issues to be addressed,” he said.
“Sadly the prime minister appears to be unwilling to bring matters to a head and submit himself to a vote. Therefore the only option is for Conservative MPs to facilitate a vote of confidence. I have already taken the appropriate action.”
Almost 30 Conservative MPs have now publicly called for the prime minister’s resignation and others have criticised his leadership, fuelling speculation that Sir Graham may have received close to the 54 letters needed to trigger a vote. If Mr Johnson wins a confidence vote, he cannot be challenged again for 12 months but if he loses, he cannot be a candidate in the subsequent leadership contest.
