It is a cliché that the most difficult task of politics is to be the leader of the opposition, but when a vacancy in the heart of the government was left unfilled for five months, Labor experts joked that it was, instead, the role of Boris Johnson’s ethics advisor. .
An awkward hole in the Prime Minister’s team had been created after the departure in November 2020 of Alex Allen, who resigned as adviser on ministerial interests after the number 10 dismissed his report accusing the Minister of ‘Interior, Priti Patel, school bullying.
As the wait for a replacement dragged on, stories revolved around a scandal that was dubbed “curtain cash”; They ran out of evidence on Johnson using a Conservative donor to help cover the costs of an apparent £ 200,000 makeover of his Downing Street flat.
Anyone who inherited the role of Allen knew that the problem would be the top of his inbox and an immediate proof of his recklessness.
Christopher Geidt, a former private secretary to the Queen for 10 years, was waiting on the wings.
Christopher Geidt. Photo: Gareth Fuller / PA
It took him weeks to persuade him to accept the job, experts say, and Cabinet Secretary Simon Case had to be hired to persuade a man with a seemingly flawless history of public service to jeopardize his reputation. .
Little was known about Lord Geidt, who, in one of his only public recordings, described himself as “what is known as ‘one of those men in suits'”. But he was quickly thrown into the public eye with the heavy task of deciding whether Johnson had lied about his knowledge of decorating payments.
In his report published a month later, in May 2021, Geidt gave Johnson the benefit of the doubt, saying Johnson knew nothing about “neither the fact nor the method of costs.”
In a comment that would haunt him again, Geidt said he had spoken to Johnson and was assured that he “knew nothing of these payments” until media reports began.
After about a relatively quieter six months at work, Geidt’s reputation plummeted when Johnson and the donor had in fact exchanged texts on the funds.
It only emerged through a more rigorous investigation by the Electoral Commission, which fined the Conservative Party for failing to disclose payments, and left Geidt in the red.
The pressure grew for Geidt to reopen his investigation and he agreed. However, she was almost the least of Johnson’s concerns, as the prime minister was also defending allegations of parties violating Covid’s law.
Despite the hope of opposition MPs that Geidt would reprimand Johnson for refusing to hand over the texts, during the new year came the news that the prime minister needed to be clarified.
Geidt had not reopened his research, but instead published an exchange of letters that mildly criticized “foolish” decisions and a “deficiency in standards” for his research.
When the news leaked that Johnson was due to be clarified days before the official announcement, Geidt was furious. “I wasn’t happy with that, it’s fair to say,” one source said, while others reported that one should speak out for resignation.
What seemed to convince him to stay was a guarantee from Johnson that he would consider Geidt’s proposals to strengthen his role as an ethics consultant.
Among other requests, Geidt had called for a larger team of officials and the “highest standards of openness, including full and prompt responses to requests for information from ministers, special advisers and officials.”
Detailed proposals of No. 10 were promised, with growing demands for Geidt to initiate investigations himself, given the possible conflict of interest in which this power would remain in the hands of a prime minister who had himself faced research.
That power never materialized, and Geidt fell silent as the metropolitan police and Sue Gray’s investigations progressed.
When both Partygate investigations ended and Johnson had been fined for attending a birthday meeting in defiance of strict blocking laws, Geidt forced the prime minister to publicly address why he should not be investigated for violating the ministerial code. Since the code enshrines the need for honesty, integrity, and leadership, Geidt decided that Johnson should publicly state how he had lived up to these principles.
In a move that angered Geidt even more, Johnson blamed a “failed communication between our offices” for not realizing that his ethics advisor wanted him to be held accountable for his actions.
Whitehall sources said that given that he was probably aware of the importance of his resignation, Geidt could have refused to resign at a time of maximum danger for Johnson, when 41% of Conservative MPs voted to declare that they did not trust the prime minister.
His nerves calmed down when Geidt performed a characteristically gentle performance in front of a parliamentary committee on Tuesday.
Boris Johnson could have broken the ministerial code, says the ethics adviser – video
But after what was said to be a “soul-searching” night, he was shocked by the cabinet office and number 10 when he resigned just over a year from work.
In the end, Geidt said, his decision to resign was sparked by Johnson seeking to break the ministerial code with a plan to expand steel tariffs, defying World Trade Organization rules.
An official who worked with Geidt noted, “It may be a convenient hill to die on, or the drop that broke the camel’s back, or maybe both are true.”