The Government’s ethics chief has “serious concerns” about Boris Johnson’s plan to neuter Britain’s election watchdog, Michael Gove has been warned.
Lord Evans, who chairs the Committee on Standards in Public Life, wrote to the Levelling Up Secretary over plans to allow Number 10 to set the “strategic direction” for the Electoral Commission.
He said his committee remained “deeply troubled” that the changes would put our democratic system at risk - adding they would “give the government of the day, whatever its political complexion, the opportunity to exert influence on the way the Commission operates.”
The watering down of the Electoral Commission’s powers will come in the PM’s controversial Elections Bill - which could become law as soon as this week.
As well as giving the Government more power over the ‘independent’ watchdog, it would effectively bar them from launching prosecutions against people - including politicians - who break electoral law.
![](https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article26776564.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/0_Boris-Johnsons-careless-over-standards.jpg)
The changes were announced last year, while the Commission was investigating the Conservative Party over the refurbishment of Mr Johnson’s Downing Street flat.
The Party was eventually fined £17,800 for breaching electoral law over the funding of the refurb.
And their investigation ignited a row over whether Mr Johnson had been fully transparent with Lord Geidt, his own ethics advisor, who had previously cleared him of breaking the rules.
WhatsApp messages relating to the scandal were obtained by the Commission which were not given to Lord Geidt before his earlier probe - and revealed the PM had begged a donor for more cash to pay for the refurb.
Mr Johnson denied misleading Lord Geidt over the texts.
Lord Evans wrote: “The Commission is an important safeguard against political interference in the electoral system and thus occupies a unique position as a regulator - it is not a body that exists to deliver government policy, but the arbiter of electoral fairness.
“As such, it must be operationally independent and be seen to be so.”