‘No ethics at No 10’: Boris Johnson considers scrapping Lord Geidt’s role

System to enforce ministerial code under review as ethics adviser resigns over Partygate and steel tariffs row

Boris Johnson is considering scrapping the role of ethics adviser after the resignation of Lord Geidt, who accused him of making a mockery of his position overseeing standards in government.

The prime minister’s official spokesperson said Johnson would not immediately start looking for a replacement for Geidt, but would instead review the system of enforcing the ministerial code.

The spokesperson said it was “vitally important” that the code was upheld, but that the prime minister had not yet decided the “exact mechanism” of doing so.

Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, said the move demonstrated “there are no ethics in Boris Johnson’s Downing Street”. She said: “It appears he will now try to keep it that way, content to further debase standards in public life and demean his office.”

The Liberal Democrat leader, Ed Davey, said: “Boris Johnson has no ethics, so it’s no surprise he wants to scrap his ethics adviser.”

In a strongly worded resignation letter published by Downing Street on Thursday, Geidt cited Johnson’s problematic response to the Partygate scandal as one reason for his departure.

But he made clear the final straw had been a request from Johnson for Geidt to approve a plan to extend tariffs on steel imports, which could break World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, putting the government in breach of international law.

The ministerial code includes an “overarching duty,” for ministers to comply with the law. Geidt said the request had put him in an “impossible and odious position”.

“The idea that a prime minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own code is an affront. A deliberate breach, or even an intention to do so, would be to suspend the provisions of the code to suit a political end.

“This would make a mockery not only of respect for the code but licence the suspension of its provisions in governing the conduct of Her Majesty’s ministers. I can have no part in this.”

In his reply to Geidt, Johnson insisted his intention was to seek Geidt’s “advice on the national interest in protecting a crucial industry, which is protected in other European countries and would suffer material harm if we do not continue to apply such tariffs”.

Geidt’s predecessor, Alex Allan, quit in November 2020 after the prime minister ignored his finding that Priti Patel had bullied civil servants.

Allan said he was “very sad” that his successor had also felt forced to quit. “I just felt really upset that Christopher Geidt, who is a very honourable man, had been put in a position where he felt he had no option but to resign.

“I’ve known him for many years, and he’s a dedicated public servant, a man with lots of integrity, and he wouldn’t have taken this decision lightly. It’s very sad that it’s come to this,” he told the BBC.

Asked whether he believed Johnson was a man of integrity, Allan replied: “I’m not going to answer that.”

William Wragg, the Conservative chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee , which grilled Geidt on Tuesday, said: “For the prime minister to lose one adviser on ministers’ interests may be regarded as misfortune, but to lose two looks like carelessness.”

Geidt suggested during the cross-party hearing that it was “reasonable” to suggest Johnson may have broken the ministerial code, when he received a fixed penalty notice for attending a birthday party during a 2020 lockdown.

The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, told ITV News on Thursday that he did not believe he had broken the ministerial code, despite receiving a fixed penalty notice for the same party – because Johnson is the final judge of it.

“Lord Geidt I think acknowledges the ultimate arbiter of our ministerial code is the PM, that is how our system works, and the prime minister has fully addressed that matter,” he said.

Johnson recently published a letter, at the urging of Geidt, explaining why he did not think he had broken the code. His reasoning included the fact that he had not believed he was breaking Covid rules at the time. Sunak said he was “sad to see what Lord Geidt has written, and sorry to see him go”.

Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA union representing senior civil servants, urged the government to put in place measures immediately to ensure concerns about ministers’ behaviour can still be investigated.

“The ministerial code is the only mechanism a civil servant can use to raise a complaint of misconduct, bullying or sexual harassment against a minister. Confidence in that process has already been severely damaged by the prime minister’s refusal to accept that the home secretary had breached the code, despite being found to have bullied staff,” he said.

Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BST

“If the prime minister does not intend to replace Lord Geidt, then he must immediately put in place measures that ensure a civil servant can, with confidence, raise a complaint about ministerial misconduct.”

Rebel Tory MPs hoping to drum up support for a future vote of no confidence in Johnson said Geidt’s abrupt departure would not necessarily help their cause. One former minister said Geidt’s rationale was “slightly obscure” despite the strong language in his letter.

Many at Westminster, including some government officials, were mystified as to why Geidt had been asked to rule on the steel tariffs, which were extended for 12 months a year ago using emergency legislation.

Catherine Haddon, of the Institute for Government, said: “What is somewhat baffling is what he was being asked to adjudicate on and why, because the government have had a series of cases, including Northern Ireland but also others, on international law and their willingness to breach it.”

Peter Holmes, of the UK Trade Policy Observatory at Sussex University, said: “I’m completely puzzled. Almost invariably when you introduce anti-dumping measures, you claim that what you’re doing is consistent with the WTO. So to ask Geidt’s opinion on an anti-dumping duty, it’s totally bizarre. He has no expertise in this area. You would ask Suella Braverman [the attorney general] whether it’s legal.”

One government insider said: “I don’t know what his involvement is in this: he’s not a lawyer.” They added that it seemed “particularly helpful” to the government that the issue at stake – steel tariffs – was one where Labour backed the government’s stance.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexit opportunities minister, told the BBC’s Newsnight that Geidt had resigned “over an issue relating to protecting the British steel industry,” adding, “the prime minister is backing British industry and he’s right to be doing so”.

Johnson said in his letter that he had made the decision to refer the matter to Geidt following advice from the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) – an independent body set up after Brexit.

However, the TRA later issued a statement insisting it had provided analysis, but not made any recommendations – and that ministers had “called in” the issue of steel tariffs, so the decision now lies entirely with them.

Both Johnson and the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, are keen for the tariffs to continue. “If you drop the safeguards the UK effectively becomes a landing zone for Chinese steel dumping, if the EU keep theirs,” said a source in Kwarteng’s department.

Contributors

Heather Stewart and Richard Partington

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
Boris Johnson v ethics adviser: what is row over steel tariffs about?
Analysis: PM said he sought Lord Geidt’s advice on whether overriding trade rules would be in line with ministerial code

Richard Partington

17, Jun, 2022 @6:29 AM

Article image
‘An electoral liability’: business loses patience with Boris Johnson
Analysis: With Tory party in turmoil, firms frustrated and a cost of living crisis, time is not on PM’s side

Alex Lawson and Larry Elliott

08, Jun, 2022 @7:06 AM

Article image
Theresa May considers Brexit role for Boris Johnson in cabinet reshuffle
PM believed to be working on new year changes to refresh senior team and attempt to reassert her authority

Anushka Asthana Political editor

01, Jan, 2018 @9:14 AM

Article image
Boris Johnson to consider using army to supply petrol stations
Ministers to discuss emergency plan Operation Escalin after BP reveals a third of forecourts have shortages

Aubrey Allegretti

26, Sep, 2021 @7:28 PM

Article image
Boris Johnson a bad role model for children, says social mobility tsar
Katharine Birbalsingh questions PM’s private life and says he does not look ‘professional enough’

Jamie Grierson

10, Jun, 2022 @9:24 AM

Article image
Tory rebels threaten Boris Johnson after majority cut to one
Prime minister faces losing control of parliament after Lib Dem byelection win

Jessica Elgot Chief political correspondent

02, Aug, 2019 @5:42 PM

Article image
Boris Johnson plays for time with a cautious, tepid manifesto
Prime minister pins his hope on ‘getting Brexit done’ while not scoring any own goals

Larry Elliott

25, Nov, 2019 @6:00 AM

Article image
The cost of Boris Johnson: pricing up the next PM's pledges
From nationwide full-fibre broadband to 20,000 extra police officers, here’s what 10 of his plans might cost

Larry Elliott Economics editor

23, Jul, 2019 @4:32 PM

Article image
Boris Johnson accused of misleading ethics adviser over No 10 refurb
Funding plea to Tory donor last year appears to contradict PM’s assurance he did not know identity of benefactor

Jessica Elgot, Aubrey Allegretti and Peter Walker

09, Dec, 2021 @9:01 PM

Article image
The flat UK economy still points to a Boris Johnson election victory
Ted Heath’s 1974 election gamble offers a bad precedent for the PM. Heath lost, but the economy makes it Johnson’s to lose

Larry Elliott

08, Sep, 2019 @10:34 AM