Boris Johnson has apologised to his ministerial standards adviser for the failure to disclose messages between the Prime Minister and a Tory peer over the funding of the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat.
Mr Johnson, in a letter released on Thursday, said he was “sorry that the Office of Independent Adviser has been put in this position” and that he can “only repeat the humble and sincere apology” he had already offered Lord Geidt.
The exterior of Number 10 Downing Street.
Daniel Leal-Olivas
Mr Johnson said he did not have access to his previous mobile phone, from which the messages had been sent, and “did not recall the message exchange”.
But he said: “A fuller explanation of the circumstances should have been provided at the time of your investigation. I am sorry we did not do so.”
Lord Geidt said a failure to alert him to WhatsApp messages exchanged with Tory donor Lord Brownlow had been “unwise”.
The adviser added: “I will wish to count on your offer to fortify what you have described as the Independent Adviser’s critical role for effective government
“I am therefore glad to have your proposal of immediate measures to support my appointment and help address some of the failures of process evident in this case.
“An increase in the level of dedicated official assistance, bolstering the small and highly professional team presently supporting my appointment, will be of great assistance.”
In his letter to Lord Geidt, the Prime Minister said it was “unacceptable” that the Cabinet Office did not inform Lord Geidt of the existence of the messages.
He said Tory peer Lord Brownlow had offered to share the messages with the Cabinet Office but that the department had felt this was inappropriate to receive these while the Electoral Commission was undertaking an investigation.
Mr Johnson said: “It is unacceptable that the Cabinet Office did not at the very least inform you of the position they had taken.”
The Prime Minister's standards adviser, Lord Geidt.
Dominic Lipinski
Mr Johnson said the Electoral Commission’s “preliminary conclusions” had included a “short reference” to the exchange but that it “would not have been straightforward” to have briefed Lord Geidt due to confidentiality restrictions.
In an earlier letter to Boris Johnson, Lord Geidt was highly critical of the failure to provide him with the “missing exchange”.
On December 17, the ministerial interests adviser said: “It is plainly unsatisfactory that my earlier advice was unable to rely on the fullest possible disclosure of relevant information.
“Clearly, a very serious degree of risk attends a Prime Minister’s commission of an investigation by the independent adviser into activity touching directly on the Prime Minister’s interests, when that investigation is subsequently shown to have proceeded without reference to material requiring disclosure.”
Lord Geidt expressed his “grave concern” that the missing messages were not provided to him initially or when Boris Johnson’s old phone was accessed in June last year “for another purpose”.
He wrote in the December 17 letter: “It is of grave concern to me that, neither at the time when the Cabinet Office was collecting information ahead of my report, nor subsequently when the device had been activated again, was any attempt made to check for information relevant to my enquiries, such as the missing exchange.
“I consider that the greatest possible care should have been taken to assemble all relevant material and this standard has not been met.”
Lord Geidt added: “In circumstances where communications between the Prime Minister and Lord Brownlow were highly material to my enquiries (operating independently from the Cabinet Office), it is very unfortunate that the missing exchange was not obtained or made available to me.”
Lord Geidt said the “shortcomings” shows “evidence of insufficient care for the role of your independent adviser”.
“Beyond that, however, I believe a far greater threat to public confidence attaches to the exchanges unrecalled, the messages undisclosed, the data unconsidered and the subsequent misjudgements about the impact of the messages which I have had to weigh in this initial advice,” he added.