The government rejected Commons’ instruction to release information on the decision to make Evgeny Lebedev a colleague, saying it would undermine the confidentiality of the nominees and could degenerate into “political points”.
Labor called the decision a “cover-up” and promised more action against what it called disrespect for parliament.
The statement said the information was instead provided to the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC). This provoked immediate opposition from the ISC, which said its request for details about Lebedev was separate and should have remained secret.
In March, parliament passed a modest Labor speech amid a threatened Tory uprising, ordering ministers to publish information about the rise of the Russian-born businessman and son of a former KGB officer.
The vote, in which Tory MPs were instructed to abstain, given the Conservatives’ concern over the issue, revealed revelations that intelligence services had concerns about Lebedev’s title, awarded by Boris Johnson, a close friend.
But a nine-page cabinet document released Thursday contained no new information other than a handful of edited emails, including one in which Lebedev confirmed he had filled out a form and another in which an unidentified official congratulated him on the title.
The only other information was already known, such as a complete list of people who became political peers in 2020 with Lebedev.
In a parallel written explanation, Cabinet Minister Michael Ellis said that as long as the government “is and remains committed to openness and transparency”, it will not comply with the request of the municipalities.
Ministers provided a more detailed response to the ISC “following a separate request from them for information on any national security issues,” he said.
In response, the ISC said it was “surprised” that Ellis linked the two requests in its statement, adding: “As far as the ISC is concerned, at this stage our request for information had to remain a private – and classified – matter of oversight. ”
In a statement, Ellis said ministers must balance openness with the “wider public interest” and it would not be useful to publish details of the scrutiny given to future colleagues.
“I can assure parliament that any information that shows national security concerns stemming from a future appointment will be carefully considered before a decision is made,” he wrote.
“It is essential that the confidentiality of these arrangements be maintained, as this ensures that verification procedures are adequately stable and trustworthy, while protecting the personal and personal data of those who have entered the verification process.”
In an almost veiled warning about the consequences of accepting the request, Ellis wrote: “Dear members, you should be aware that requests for information on internal correspondence from [House of Lords appointments] a commission may also apply to such opposition recommendations (including those rejected or withdrawn). I do not believe that it would be in the public interest for such internal correspondence to be used in the future for political points. “
He concluded: “Lord Lebedev is a man of good repute.”
Deputy Labor leader Angela Raynor said: “It looks like a cover and it smells like a cover because it’s a cover. If the Prime Minister claims that he did not take part in the coercion by awarding the title of peer to a person who is concerned about our intelligence services, he must stand up and publish the documents according to the instructions of the parliament.
“The government is once again trying to hide in the shadows of the sunlight of control. We will take steps to correct this disrespect for parliament. “
Boris Johnson’s deputy spokesman defended the decision. “It is our responsibility to protect the integrity of the verification process, which, as you know, is carried out voluntarily on a confidential basis,” they said. “We are committed to transparency, but the disclosure we have made reflects the need to maintain the integrity of the system.
Add Comment