BORIS Johnson was "ill-served" by officials over the funding plans for his lavish Downing Street flat refurbishment, but did not breach the ministerial code.
According to a report by his new adviser on ministerial standards Lord Geidt, the Prime Minister "unwisely" allowed the go-ahead for the renovations at No.11 Downing Street "without more rigorous regard" for how it would be paid for.
His report also says that Mr Johnson did not know how the costs of the work were covered, and that they had been paid for by Tory peer Lord Brownlow, until shortly before they were first reported by the media.
It was previously reported that Mr Johnson had considered setting up a charitable trust to fund the works, which was to be chaired by Lord Brownlow, and that he provided a substantial amount of the money for the revamp.
However Lord Geidt's report states: "At no point in the eight months until late February 2021, as media reports were emerging, was the Prime Minister made aware of either the fact or the method of the costs of refurbishing the apartment having been paid."
He explained that the Prime Minister had considered a Trust as he was "explicit about not wishing to burden the public purse."
While in hospital in April 2020, the work began on the flat, however the report explains that legal advice received in June "raised doubts about whether the Trust, as initially conceived, would be capable of dealing with costs associated with the private residences at Downing Street."
Lord Geidt's report states that in "late autumn" last year, 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."
It adds: "On 20 October 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."
It also states that Mr Johnson, when he found out about Lord Brownlow's payment for the work, "settled the full amount himself on 8 March 2021".
The report raises questions about why Cabinet Office officials failed to tell Mr Johnson about the funding arrangements for the flat, and why the Prime Minister did not ask about them.
Lord Geidt's report appears to excuse Boris Johnson's lack of inquiry about the payments, stating: "In the middle of a pandemic, the current Prime Minister simply accepted that the Trust would be capable of satisfactorily resolving the situation without further interrogation.
"It is the case that the Prime Minister was ill-served when officials did become aware, albeit they were no doubt also managing their own very difficult circumstances."
A No. 10 spokesman said the report "shows the Prime Minister acted in accordance with the Ministerial Code at all times."
He added: "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."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel