Simon Case dismisses complaints over PM code powers

The Cabinet Secretary today dismissed complaints that Boris Johnson is ‘marking his own homework’ by taking final decisions on whether ministers have broken conduct rules. 

Simon Case played down the backlash after the PM refused to give his new ministerial standards adviser Lord Geidt the final say on the code.

The peer, a former private secretary to the Queen, is in the middle of an investigation into how renovations on Mr Johnson’s grace-and-favour Downing Street flat were funded.

The premier has refused to engage with questions over whether Tory funds were originally used without being declared, before Mr Johnson later repaid the costs. 

Opposition MPs have voiced anger that Mr Johnson remains the ‘ultimate arbiter’ of the ministerial code, meaning he effectively rules on his own conduct.

But Mr Case, who is also reviewing the Downing Street refurbishment along with the Electoral Commission, defended the situation as he gave evidence to a Lords committee today.

He argued that Britain’s unwritten constitution set out that ‘hiring and firing’ powers in Government must rest with the Prime Minister, even in situations where that might appear ‘odd’.

Mr Case, when put to him that the current set-up allowed the Conservative Party leader to ‘mark his own homework’, told the Lords Constitution Committee: ‘The role of ministers derives from a fundamental constitutional principle which is that ministers are appointed by the sovereign on the advice of the Prime Minister by the use of prerogative powers.

‘So while we have now the distinguished Lord Geidt in the role of independent adviser – other people can get involved in the role of adviser, as the title makes clear – but under our constitutional settlement, the decision, the hiring and firing of ministers is an act by the sovereign on the advice of the Prime Minister.

‘That is just one of our basic constitutional principles and sometimes people find that odd but that’s just the basics of our constitutional settlement.’

The PM appointed Lord Geidt last month after Sir Alex Allan resigned from the advisory position in November over Mr Johnson’s decision to stand by Home Secretary Priti Patel, despite an investigation finding her conduct towards staff ‘amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying’.

Labour has called for Ms Patel to once again be investigated for an alleged ‘flagrant breach’ of the ministerial code by lobbying a fellow minister in an attempt to secure a healthcare firm access to a personal protective equipment (PPE) deal said to be worth £20 million.

The party has urged Mr Case to investigate the Home Secretary over efforts to sway the award of a contract after being approached by a Tory activist.

Mr Case told peers there were ‘sanctions’ available should ministers be found to have breached the code.

‘The sanctions are set out in the ministerial code or the Civil Service code,’ he told the committee.

‘They are set out, there are sanctions. For example, in the ministerial code, it was very clear the ultimate arbiter of behaviour under the ministerial code is the Prime Minister. That is how things operate.

‘Of course first and foremost it is for ministers themselves to uphold and explain their behaviour under the code, but those sanctions are there.’