Boris Johnson is considering removing his role as ethics adviser following the resignation of Lord Hyde, who accused him of mocking his position by monitoring government standards.
A spokesman for the prime minister said Johnson would not immediately start looking for a replacement for Hyde, but would instead review the system for implementing the ministerial code.
The spokesman said it was “vital” that the code be complied with, but that the prime minister had not yet decided on the “exact mechanism”.
Deputy Labor leader Angela Raynor said the move demonstrated that “there is no ethic on Boris Johnson’s Downing Street”. She said: “It seems that now he will try to stay that way, pleased that he is further lowering the standards of public life and humiliating his service.”
Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said: “Boris Johnson has no ethics, so it’s no surprise that he wants to overthrow his ethics adviser.
In a strong letter of resignation published by Downing Street on Thursday, Hyde cited Johnson’s problematic response to the Partygate scandal as one of the reasons for his departure.
But he made it clear that the last straw was Johnson’s request to Geidt to approve a plan to increase tariffs on steel imports, which could violate World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and put the government in violation of international law.
The Ministerial Code includes a “comprehensive obligation” for ministers to comply with the law. Hyde said the request put him in an “impossible and disgusting position.”
“The idea that a prime minister may be involved in deliberately violating his own code is an insult. A deliberate violation or even intent to do so would be to suspend the provisions of the Code in order to serve a political purpose.
“This would make a mockery not only of respect for the code, but would also allow the suspension of its provisions in the conduct management of Her Majesty’s ministers. I can’t take part in that. “
In a reply to Geidt, Johnson insisted that his intention was to seek “Geidt’s advice on the national interest in protecting an important industry that is protected in other European countries and will suffer material damage if we do not continue to apply such tariffs.”
Hyde’s predecessor, Alex Allen, resigned in November 2020 after the prime minister ignored his statement that Priti Patel had harassed government officials.
Alan said he was “very sad” that his successor also felt compelled to leave. “I was just really upset that Christopher Hyde, who is a very respectable man, was put in a position where he felt he had no choice but to resign.
“I have known him for many years and he is a dedicated civil servant, a man of great integrity and I would not take this decision lightly. “It is very sad that this has happened,” he told the BBC.
Asked if he believed Johnson was an honest man, Allen said, “I’m not going to answer that.”
William Ragg, the conservative chairman of the Committee on Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs, who annoyed Hyde on Tuesday, said: “Losing the prime minister to one ministerial adviser may be considered unfortunate, but the loss of two seems negligent. ”
During the inter-party hearing, Gade suggested that it was “reasonable” to assume that Johnson may have violated the ministerial code when he received a fixed notice of punishment for attending a birthday party during the 2020 blockade.
Chancellor Rishi Sunak told ITV News on Thursday that he did not believe he had violated the ministerial code, even though he had received a fixed notice of punishment for the same party – because Johnson was the last judge to do so.
“I think Lord Hyde recognizes that the ultimate arbiter of our ministerial code is the prime minister, that’s how our system works, and the prime minister has fully addressed this issue,” he said.
Johnson recently published a letter, at Hyde’s urging, explaining why he didn’t think he had broken the code. His reasoning includes the fact that at the time he did not believe he was breaking Covid’s rules. Sunak said he was “sad to see what Lord Hyde has written and regrets seeing him leave.”
Dave Penman, secretary general of the FDA union representing senior government officials, called on the government to take immediate action to ensure that concerns about ministerial behavior can still be investigated.
“The Code of Ministers is the only mechanism a civil servant can use to file a complaint of misconduct, harassment or sexual harassment against a minister. “Confidence in this process has already been severely damaged by the prime minister’s refusal to accept that the interior minister has violated the code, even though he has been found to have harassed staff,” he said.
Sign up for the First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BST
“If the Prime Minister does not intend to replace Lord Hyde, then he must immediately put in place measures to ensure that the civil servant can confidently lodge a complaint about the misconduct of ministers.”
Rebel Tory lawmakers, hoping to gain support for a future no-confidence vote against Johnson, said Hyde’s sudden departure would not necessarily help their cause. One former minister said Hyde’s justification was “slightly vague” despite the harsh language in his letter.
Many in Westminster, including some government officials, were puzzled as to why Hyde had been asked to rule on steel tariffs, which were extended 12 months a year ago under emergency law.
Catherine Hadden, of the Institute of Governance, said: “What is somewhat confusing is what was asked to be said and why, as the government has had a number of cases, including Northern Ireland, but also others, on international law and their willingness to break it. “
Peter Holmes of the United Kingdom’s Trade Policy Observatory at the University of Sussex said: “I am completely puzzled. Almost invariably, when you impose anti-dumping measures, you claim that what you are doing is WTO compliant. So to ask Geidt’s opinion on the anti-dumping duty is completely strange. He has no experience in this field. You will ask Suela Braverman [the attorney general] whether it is legal. “
An insider from the government said: “I don’t know what his involvement is: he is not a lawyer. They added that it seemed “particularly useful” to the government that the issue – steel tariffs – was one in which Labor backed the government’s position.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, Brexit Minister for Opportunities, told BBC Newsnight that Gade had resigned “over a problem with the protection of the British steel industry”, adding that the Prime Minister supported the British industry and was right that makes it”.
Johnson said in his letter that he had decided to refer the matter to Geidt following advice from the Trade Authority (TRA), an independent body set up after Brexit.
However, the TRA later issued a statement insisting that it had provided an analysis but made no recommendations – and that ministers had “called” for the issue of steel tariffs, so the decision is now entirely up to them.
Both Johnson and Business Secretary Quasi Quarteng are pushing for tariffs to continue. “If you lift precautionary measures, the United Kingdom will effectively become a landing area for Chinese steel dumping if the EU maintains its own,” said a source in the Quarteng division.
Add Comment