Scotland Yard is considering whether to investigate Boris Johnson over the funding of his Downing Street flat renovation after Labour’s lawyers claimed there was a “reasonable suspicion” that he had broken anti-bribery laws.
Solicitors on behalf of Labour wrote to the Metropolitan police commissioner, Dame Cressida Dick, last week suggesting the force was “duty-bound” to begin a formal investigation.
They said the prime minister may have acted improperly by having “linked” a request for funds to cover the refurbishment works – which eventually cost at least £112,000 – with a promise to “promote a project” backed by the benefactor.
Last month the Met announced a criminal inquiry into 12 alleged Downing Street parties, including several attended by Johnson, after initially saying it would not investigate until the completion of the Sue Gray report.
A series of messages exchanged in November 2020 between Johnson and David Brownlow, a Conservative peer and donor, showed the prime minister seeking funds for the refurbishment while promising to consider plans for a “great exhibition”. Publication of the messages last month, as part of letters exchanged by Johnson and his independent ethics adviser, Christopher Geidt, prompted claims that Johnson had acted corruptly.
Labour’s lawyers, from the firm Edwards Duthie Shamash, claimed the contents of the three messages showed Johnson “chose to link” the request for Brownlow to approve money to spruce up the No 11 flat with an assurance he was “taking some steps” on the great exhibition project, known as GE2. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Brownlow.
Brownlow thanked Johnson for thinking about the plan. Seven weeks later, the peer secured a meeting with the culture secretary, Oliver Dowden, to discuss the idea further. The government has refused to publish the minutes of that meeting but a spokesperson said GE2 was an “idea that wasn’t taken forward”.
Labour’s lawyers said that despite an investigation by the Electoral Commission finding the Conservatives failed to properly declare a £52,801 donation from Brownlow’s company Huntswood Associates Limited, and another inquiry by Geidt that found Johnson had acted unwisely, there were other “matters left uninvestigated and unconsidered”.
They said the previous investigations had not looked at potential corruption or bribery by the prime minister, whether further messages were exchanged between Johnson and Brownlow and what action the prime minister took when he promised to “revert” in relation to the great exhibition project.
Gerald Shamash said in the letter to the Met: “It is respectfully suggested that the known facts and the clear, sensible inferences to which some of those facts give rise create such reasonable suspicion that, were the suspect anyone other than the prime minister, the Metropolitan police would rightly consider itself duty-bound to investigate.
“Indeed, if anything, the fact that the suspicion arises in relation to someone in such a high office makes it more, not less, important in the public interest that these matters are investigated.”
Shamash said Johnson would have broken the Bribery Act if, in the course of carrying out a public function, he had requested financial help and carried out his duties as prime minister improperly, whether intentionally or not.
DI Akshay Chibber, a staff officer to Dick, acknowledged receipt of the letter and promised “an appropriate response in due course”. A Met spokesperson said: “A letter was received and acknowledged on Friday 4 February. It is being considered by officers from the Met’s central specialist crime [unit]. No investigation has been opened.”
Brownlow declined to comment. He has cooperated fully with the two investigations so far, conducted by the Electoral Commission and Geidt.
A No 10 spokesperson said: “These allegations are categorically untrue and a clear misrepresentation of the facts. Lord Brownlow, separate to his work for the emerging Downing Street Trust, put proposals from the Royal Albert Hall, the national institution and charity, to the prime minister. This was passed to the lead department, DCMS [the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport]. It is a matter of public record that no project was taken forward by the government.”
The extent of Johnson’s contact with Brownlow about the flat funding came to light in December, when the Electoral Commission confirmed the existence of WhatsApp messages between them.
The revelation appeared at odds with the prime minister telling Geidt in May 2021 that he knew nothing about where the money to fund the renovation came from. Johnson says he did not know Brownlow was a source of funding rather than an organiser.
After nearly a year of the costs being met by a combination of Brownlow, Huntswood, the Cabinet Office and the Conservative party, the Electoral Commission said the Cabinet Office confirmed in March 2021 that Johnson had “paid all bills with the supplier personally”.
The prime minister was forced to apologise for not divulging the messages to Geidt but said he did not recall them and that there were “security issues” that prevented him from accessing the messages on his phone.
The WhatsApp exchange
Johnson to Brownlow, 12.59pm 29 November 2020
Hi David
I am afraid parts of our flat are still a bit of a tip and am keen to allow Lulu Lytle to get on with it. Can I possibly ask her to get in touch with you for approvals ?
Many thanks and all best
Boris
Ps am on the great exhibition plan Will revert
Brownlow to Johnson, 3.44pm
Afternoon Prime Minister, I hope you’re both well
Sorry for the delay I was out for a walk and didn’t have my ‘work’ phone with me.
Of course, get Lulu to call me and we’ll get it sorted ASAP !
Thanks for thinking about GE2
Best wishes
David
Brownlow to Johnson, 4.10pm
I should have said, as the Trust isn’t set up yet (will be in January) approval is a doddle as it’s only me and I know where the £ will come from, so as soon as Lulu calls we can crack on - David
