Boris Johnson is facing legal action over his award of a peerage to a wealthy Tory backer against the advice of the official House of Lords watchdog.
Electoral Commission records show Peter Cruddas, a former Conservative Party treasurer, gave the Tories a further £500,000 just three days after taking up his seat in the upper chamber last February.
The City financier – who has given the party more than £3 million since 2010 – has strongly denied there was any link between the donation and his receipt of a life peerage.
However the Good Law Project – which has brought a series of judicial review cases against the Government over the award of contracts during the pandemic – has said it intends to challenge his appointment in the courts.
The legal campaign group’s director Jo Maugham said it was unprecedented for the Prime Minister to press ahead with the nomination after objections were raised by the independent House of Lords Appointments Commission.
The body – which vets new peerages – raised “historic concerns” over allegations that Lord Cruddas had offered access to then-prime minister David Cameron in exchange for donations to the party.
Mr Maugham said the Good Law Project’s lawyers had advised there was “apparent bias” in Mr Johnson’s decision to continue with his appointment regardless.
He said: “The independent watchdog didn’t think Peter Cruddas should be given a peerage. But Boris Johnson ignored their advice and appointed him anyway.
“Just three days after he entered the Lords, he gave the Conservatives half a million quid. I don’t think this is lawful.
“I think a fair-minded observer, presented with the facts, would conclude there was a real possibility or danger of bias in the Prime Minister’s decision-making.”
The campaign group has set out its case in a pre-action protocol letter sent to the Prime Minister.
There was no immediate response from Downing Street.
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