> The idea that a prime minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own code is an affront.
It should be a sacking matter at least, if not a criminal offence.
A great resignation letter to be honest. Formal yet straight forward.
Its hard to see how this won’t convince a few more tories that the PMs position is untenable. But perhaps I’m being optimistic
“This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position” That’s a hell of a ‘fuck you some of us have standards’
Wait Boris had an ethic advisor?
So if I’m understanding this right, the Independent Advisor on the Ministerial Code has resigned because Johnson plans to make the Code entirely optional, which makes providing advice on whether or not conduct breaches the Code entirely redundant because Ministers get to decide whether its an acceptable breach or an unacceptable one?
>This week, however, I was tasked to offer a view about the Government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the Ministerial Code. This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position. My informal response on Monday was that you and any other Minister should justify openly your position vis-à-vis the Code in such circumstances. However, the idea that a Prime Minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own Code is an affront. A deliberate breach, or even an intention to do so, would be to suspend the provisions of the Code to suit a political end. This would make a mockery not only of respect for the Code but licence the suspension of its provisions in governing the conduct of Her Majesty’s Ministers. I can have no part in this.
Nothing will change. The nodding dogs will be sent out to say Johnson is a man of integrity and we need to move on.
He had an impact though. Boris changed the ministerial code so he wouldn’t break it.
Yet the jolly fat man looks like butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth.
The Westminster system only works if conventions are followed. Modern politics have proven that the Westminster system is no longer tenable. See also: Australia.
The concept of Boris ever having had an ethics adviser is like Hannibal Lecter having had a vegetarian cooking adviser.
11 comments
> The idea that a prime minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own code is an affront.
It should be a sacking matter at least, if not a criminal offence.
A great resignation letter to be honest. Formal yet straight forward.
Its hard to see how this won’t convince a few more tories that the PMs position is untenable. But perhaps I’m being optimistic
“This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position” That’s a hell of a ‘fuck you some of us have standards’
Wait Boris had an ethic advisor?
So if I’m understanding this right, the Independent Advisor on the Ministerial Code has resigned because Johnson plans to make the Code entirely optional, which makes providing advice on whether or not conduct breaches the Code entirely redundant because Ministers get to decide whether its an acceptable breach or an unacceptable one?
From [Geidts letter](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1083401/Lord_Geidt_letter_to_PM.pdf):
>This week, however, I was tasked to offer a view about the Government’s intention to consider measures which risk a deliberate and purposeful breach of the Ministerial Code. This request has placed me in an impossible and odious position. My informal response on Monday was that you and any other Minister should justify openly your position vis-à-vis the Code in such circumstances. However, the idea that a Prime Minister might to any degree be in the business of deliberately breaching his own Code is an affront. A deliberate breach, or even an intention to do so, would be to suspend the provisions of the Code to suit a political end. This would make a mockery not only of respect for the Code but licence the suspension of its provisions in governing the conduct of Her Majesty’s Ministers. I can have no part in this.
ooouchh!!..
–
eta:
>[The Law and Policy Blog: The curious resignation letter of Lord Geidt](https://davidallengreen.com/2022/06/the-curious-resignation-letter-of-lord-geidt/)
and:
>[Guardian: No 10 unable to explain why – in apparently unprecedented move – Geidt was asked to advise on legality of tariff policy](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/jun/16/boris-johnson-lord-geidt-resignation-conservatives-dominic-raab-partygate-uk-politics-latest?page=with:block-62ab1b5f8f08f2b5ecc695c2#block-62ab1b5f8f08f2b5ecc695c2)
and:
>[TRA statement following Prime Minister’s letter to Lord Geidt](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tra-statement-following-prime-ministers-letter-to-lord-geidt)
and:
> Lord Anderson: [The Ministerial Code still mandates compliance with international law, despite a change to its wording, as the Court of Appeal confirmed in 2018:..](https://nitter.net/bricksilk/status/1303358429474496513#m)
–
Nothing will change. The nodding dogs will be sent out to say Johnson is a man of integrity and we need to move on.
He had an impact though. Boris changed the ministerial code so he wouldn’t break it.
Yet the jolly fat man looks like butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth.
The Westminster system only works if conventions are followed. Modern politics have proven that the Westminster system is no longer tenable. See also: Australia.
The concept of Boris ever having had an ethics adviser is like Hannibal Lecter having had a vegetarian cooking adviser.