THE decision that the Prime Minster has not breached the Ministerial Code of conduct is remarkable, but to understand it we need to look at how the code works (or not).
It is enforced by an “independent adviser” appointed by the Prime Minister. There is no process in place that has to be followed and the code is not legally enforceable. It is up to the Prime Minister to accept any recommendations the adviser makes. The ineffectiveness of the code is demonstrated by the resignation of the previous adviser, Sir Alex Allan, following the PM’s refusal to accept his finding that Home Secretary Priti Patel had broken the code.
Unlike in London, the Scottish Government has chosen to make the panel investigating breaches of the code fully independent. The current adviser administering the code is Lord Geidt. His appointment was delayed by several months without explanation, but he is now addressing the backlog.
He ruled that Matt Hancock’s failure to declare that he held shares in a firm awarded an NHS contract was a “minor breach”. Many would dispute that assessment. It is usual for those found guilty to resign, but neither Ms Patel nor Mr Hancock have done so.
Mr Johnson’s support for this position is inexcusable.
His failure to declare a gift to help pay for refurbishment of his Downing Street flat has been investigated and he was found not to have breached the code. Mr Johnson’s excuse for not declaring the gift was that he did not know where the money came from. How can a man who claims he did not know the source of this £58,000 donation be fit to run the country? Those who still think that Boris is fit to be our Prime Minister should look at his record.
Pete Rowberry
Duns
LORD Geidt’s report on ministerial interests will have been delayed as its actual ghost writer/author has been busy writing a book on Shakespeare.
Euan Lindsay
via thenational.scot
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel