Lord Geidt quit after being asked to approve ‘deliberate’ breach of ministerial code, resignation letter shows – UK politics live

Geidt says he quit because PM put him in ‘odious’ position asking him to approve ‘deliberate’ breach of code

Downing Street has now published Lord Geidt’s resignation letter.

Geidt says the final straw was a request to consider a proposal that he said would be a “deliberate and purposeful” breach of the ministerial code. He implies that Boris Johnson asked him to approve of this breach.

Here is the key passage.

This week, however, I was tasked to offer a view about the government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the ministerial code. This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position. My informal response on Monday was that you and any other minister should justify openly your position vis-à-vis the code in such circumstances. However, 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.

And here is the letter in full.

Lord Geidt’s resignation letter and Boris Johnson’s response are now on the Downing Street website here.

Sam Lowe, a trade expert who works for the Flint Global consultancy, has posted on Twitter about the dispute that seems to be behind Lord Geidt’s resignation.

So last year the independent Trade Remedies Authority recommended that the UK remove a number of safeguard tariffs on Chinese steel.

— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) June 16, 2022

The tariffs were extended for a year … until the end of this month.

At which point I now assume the UK will continue to apply the tariffs on Chinese steel (presumably again agains the recommendation of the TRA), despite not having the legal justification to do so.

— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) June 16, 2022

AND BECAUSE OF THIS, Lord Geidt has seemingly resigned …?

— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) June 16, 2022

Anyway, as one unnamed official has just pointed out to me. These safeguard tariffs can all be linked back to Trump’s trade war, so if Geidt’s resignation brings down the PM we can ultimately blame it all on Donald.

— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) June 16, 2022

Here is Boris Johnson’s reply to Lord Geidt in full.

PM’s reply to Lord Geidt
PM’s reply to Lord Geidt Photograph: No 10

The Downing Street lobby brieifing is starting soon. We may get a fuller explanation there of what the WTO tariff issue was that prompted Lord Geidt’s resignation.

Johnson says proposal that triggered Geidt’s resignation involved defying WTO tariff rules to protect a British industry

And here is an extract from Boris Johnson’s reply to Lord Geidt, in which he defends his decision to ask Lord Geidt to approve a decision that Geidt said would have risked a breach of the ministerial code. Johnson said:

You say that you were put in an impossible position regarding my seeking your advice on potential future decisions related to the Trade Remedies Authority. My intention was to seek your 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. This has in the past had cross party support. It would be in line with our domestic law but might be seen to conflict with our obligations under the WTO. In seeking your advice before any decision was taken, I was looking to ensure that we acted properly with due regard to the ministerial code.

In his letter Johnson also thanked Geidt for his work and said that his resignation on Wednesday came as a surprise, because on Monday Geidt had told him he would be happy to stay on until the end of the year.

Geidt says he quit because PM put him in ‘odious’ position asking him to approve ‘deliberate’ breach of code

Downing Street has now published Lord Geidt’s resignation letter.

Geidt says the final straw was a request to consider a proposal that he said would be a “deliberate and purposeful” breach of the ministerial code. He implies that Boris Johnson asked him to approve of this breach.

Here is the key passage.

This week, however, I was tasked to offer a view about the government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the ministerial code. This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position. My informal response on Monday was that you and any other minister should justify openly your position vis-à-vis the code in such circumstances. However, 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.

And here is the letter in full.

Shapps urges rail workers not to strike themselves out of job

Next week’s rail strikes are “designed to inflict damage at the worst possible time”, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, has said. In a speech at a train depot in north London, Mr Shapps said:

These strikes are not only a bid to derail reforms that are critical to the network’s future, and designed to inflict damage at the worst possible time, they are also an incredible act of self-harm by the union leadership.

Make no mistake, unlike the past 25 years, when rising passenger demand year after year was taken for granted by the industry, today the railway is in a fight.

It’s not only competing against other forms of public and private transport. It’s in a battle with Zoom, Teams and remote working.

In case the unions haven’t noticed, the world has changed.

Shapps urged rail workers not to strike, saying he thought they were “less militant” than their union leaders.

Don’t risk striking yourselves out of a job. Don’t pitch yourselves against the public. Let’s fix this situation and get back to building a better railway.

Shapps also said the government was planning to introduce a “range of options” to respond to future industrial action, including by making it easier for employers to respond by using agency workers.

According to the Daily Mirror’s Dan Bloom, the transport secretary defended his decision not to talk to the RMT himself about averting the strike, saying this would undermine the position of the employers.

Grant Shapps says he’s not sitting down with the RMT because “it would undermine the position of the employers in that negotiation”, after giving a lengthy speech to the media attacking the rail strikes

— Dan Bloom (@danbloom1) June 16, 2022

Shapps also denied issuing threats.

I’m “not threatening anybody”, says Grant Shapps, after repeatedly warning of job cuts if the strikes go ahead and telling workers “don’t risk striking yourself out of a job”.

— Dan Bloom (@danbloom1) June 16, 2022

A further 233 people have been rescued from the Channel and brought ashore, PA Media reports. Warm weather and low winds provided ideal crossing conditions on Tuesday. According to the latest figures from the Ministry of Defence, six boats were intercepted in the Channel on Wednesday and 233 people were rescued and brought to shore.

The UQ on Lord Geidt’s resignation is over.

Mark Spencer, leader of the Commons, has just delivered the business statement, setting out the provisional business in the Commons up to Tuesday 28 June.

There is no mention of the second reading of the Northern Ireland protocol bill. This is the most controversial legislation planned by the government for this session, but ministers do not seem to be in a hurry to debate it.

These are from the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves, who seems to know a bit more about the Geidt resignation letter.

Sounds like Geidt letter is a stinker, laying into the PM for his approach to ethics

— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) June 16, 2022

Geidt says the final straw was a commercial proposal which would break an international treaty, but which ministers believe is in the national interest

— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) June 16, 2022

But many in govt believe it’s a fig life for a guy who couldn’t get over being humiliated at a select committee hearing this week

— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) June 16, 2022

Ellis suggests Harriet Harman should recuse herself from inquiry into whether PM lied to MPs over Partygage

Andrew Murrison (Con) asked if Ellis agreed that “those placed in a position of judgement over others must not have a previously stated position on the matter in question”.

He does not name Harriet Harman, but he is clearly referring to her, and to calls for her to recuse herself from the privileges committee inquiry into claims Boris Johnson lied to parliament over Partygate because of her past tweets about the case.

Ellis says Murrison made “a very good point”. He goes on:

It is an age old principle of natural justice that no person should be a judge in their own cause. Where an individual has given a view on the guilt or innocence of any person, they ought not to then sit in judgement on that person.

Ellis also says he has no doubt that “the right honourable lady” – ie, Harman – will “consider” this point.

Some Tory MPs are trying to help Ellis by arguing that this UQ is a waste of time. Sheryll Murray said the government should be getting on with delivering for his constituents, and Peter Bone said his constitents did not even know who Geidt was anyway.

Ellis says Geidt came under ‘political pressure’ from opposition to attack PM

William Wragg (Con), chair of the public administration and constitutional affairs commtitee, says he wants to channel Lady Bracknell; to lose one ethics adviser may be a misfortune, but to lose two looks like carelessness.

He asks if it will take five months to find a replacement, which is what happened when Geidt’s predecessor, Sir Alex Allan, resigned.

Ellis says whoever does the ethics adviser job should not be “under political pressure to attack the prime minister for party political reasons”.

I am sure he will agree with me that it is important to ensure that whoever holds this role is not under constant pressure, political pressure, to attack the prime minister for party political reasons and that if they don’t they are then accused of being a lackey or a patsy.

That is not something that our independent advisers on ministerial interests deserve, we want the best public servants in our public life, we have had one in Lord Geidt and we will further in due course.

Labour says resignation of second ethics adviser to PM ‘badge of shame’ for government

Anderson is now responding.

She says the resignation of ethics advisers has now become something of a pattern. Two of them have now resigned. That is a “badge of shame” for the government, she says.

To lose one ethics adviser was really an embarrassment but to lose two in two years, just days after the prime minister’s own anti-corruption tsar walked out on him, well it is becoming a bit of a pattern.

It is a pattern of degrading the principles of our democracy. The prime minister has now driven out both of his hand-picked ethics advisers to resign in despair in two years, it is a badge of shame for this government.

She asks if the new adviser will carry on investigations that are underway. What will happen to the allegation of Islamophobia related to Mark Spencer.

She asks what the other matter briefed by the government overnight is. (See 9.15am.) Did this relate to the PM’s personal intersts?

Ellis says the letters being published will speak for themselves.

source: theguardian.com