The row between Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak today descended into a open warfare as the former PM accused his successor of “talking rubbish” about the resignation honours list saga.
Mr Johnson hit back at the prime minister after Mr Sunak accused his one-time ally of asking him to “do something I wasn’t prepared to do” by bending the rules on peerages.
In his first public comments since Mr Johnson quit as MP, a defiant Mr Sunak claimed Mr Johnson asked him to either overrule the committee which vets peerages – known as Holac – or “make promises to people” on the issue.
Mr Sunak claimed he was “not prepared to do that” because he didn’t think it was “right”. Ramping up his message, he added: “If people don’t like that, then tough.”
But Mr Johnson responded hours later, saying that all Mr Sunak needed to do was ask Holac to “renew their vetting”.
He said in a statement: “Rishi Sunak is talking rubbish. To honour these peerages it was not necessary to overrule Holac – but simply to ask them to renew their vetting, which was a mere formality.”
Mr Johnson and his allies blame Downing Street for some of his key Tory allies – including Nadine Dorries, Alok Sharma and Nigel Evans – failing to appear on the former prime minister’s resignation honours list.
As well as Mr Johnson, the saga prompted the resignation of Ms Dorries and Ms Adams, triggering three challenging by-elections for the Prime Minister as his party trails in the polls.
Speaking at the London Tech Week conference, Mr Sunak said: “Boris Johnson asked me to do something that I wasn’t prepared to do because I didn’t think it was right.
“That was to either overrule the Holac (House of Lords Appointments Commission) committee or to make promises to people.
“Now, I wasn’t prepared to do that. I didn’t think it was right and if people don’t like that, then tough.
“When I got this job I said I was going to do things differently because I wanted to change politics and that’s what I’m doing.”
After Mr Sunak’s comments, an ally of Mr Johnson fired back by accusing Mr Sunak of having “secretly blocked” a handful of peerages.
There have been claims that Mr Johnson reached a “gentleman’s agreement” with Mr Sunak that he would wave through the honours list and allow the MPs to be re-vetted by Holac at a later date so they would not have to stand down now.
But Mr Johnson’s camp has accused his successor of breaking the deal that has now enflamed tensions.
Government figures have insisted neither Mr Sunak nor Downing Street removed names from Mr Johnson’s peerages submission. Michael Gove stressed on Monday that the “appropriate procedure” and the correct “precedent” was followed.
Meanwhile Downing Street said it is is “entirely untrue” that Rishi Sunak or members of his No 10 team removed names from Boris Johnson’s peerages submission.
Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove said the ‘appropriate procedure’ and the correct ‘precedent’ was followed
Asked if anyone in No 10 spoke to the House of Lords Appointments Commission (Holac) before it made its redactions to Mr Johnson’s list, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman told reporters: “It is entirely untrue to say that anyone from No 10 attempted to remove or change or alter Holac’s list.”
The official noted that “this is a process for Holac to make a decision” and said that “when it comes to peerages, the final list comes to the Prime Minister”.
Asked whether Mr Sunak broke a deal with his predecessor under which he would have waved through the honours list – as has been suggested by Mr Johnson’s camp – the spokesman pointed to the Prime Minister’s comments on Monday morning, when he said Mr Johnson asked him to “do something I wasn’t prepared to do” by overruling Holac.
Holac, which Mr Johnson himself overruled while in No 10 over the peerage of Tory donor Peter Cruddas, has confirmed it did not support eight nominees put forward by the ex-leader.
On Saturday, Downing Street took the decision on Saturday to declassify Holac chairman Lord Bew’s approved names to Mr Sunak.
The letter, dated February 5, contains the seven peerages announced on Friday, along with a redacted name of a person who took the “personal decision to withdraw themselves”.
The row comes as the Privileges Committee is set to meet to conclude its inquiry into whether the former prime minister misled Parliament over No 10 lockdown parties.
MPs have pledged to continue the investigation process despite Mr Johnson’s Commons exit amid accusations of a “witch hunt”. But Downing Street has backed the committee, insisting is is “doing exactly what Parliament asked”.
The prime minister’s spokesman said: “This is a properly set-up committee that the House has voted to carry out their work … The government will in no way traduce or criticise the work of the committee.”
The panel is set to meet in Westminster on Monday with a view to deciding when to publish its report.
There has been speculation that the seven-person committee, which is chaired by veteran Labour MP Harriet Harman but has a Conservative majority, could release its findings in a matter of days.
The probe is thought to have ruled that Mr Johnson lied to Parliament when he told MPs Covid rules were followed in Downing Street despite boozy parties taking place while social distancing restrictions were in place.
Mr Johnson accused the committee of “bias” and likened it to a “kangaroo court”.
The Privileges Committee, in response, said Mr Johnson “impugned the integrity of the House” with his attack.
Meanwhile, as the row between Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak intensified, the former prime minister lashed out at the government for “foot-dragging” with an attempt to stop his unredacted WhatsApp messages being released to the Covid inquiry.
The former prime minister said the government’s judicial review against the inquiry is wasting “public time and money” and “frustrating the inquiry’s work”.
The Cabinet Office has launched a High Court challenge against inquiry chairwoman Baroness Hallett’s request for the wholesale handover of Mr Johnson’s messages and notebooks from the pandemic.
The Cabinet Office says some of the information requested by the inquiry does not relate to the Government’s handling of coronavirus and is “unambiguously irrelevant”.
But Baroness Hallett, a former judge, has said she should be able to decide what is relevant.
Mr Johnson has offered to bypass the Cabinet Office and give information straight to Baroness Hallett to review.
He told The Times: “The Cabinet Office has blocked me from directly sharing unredacted material with the inquiry — despite my repeated attempts to do so.
“The government wants the whole matter to be decided by the courts, even though government ministers are on record saying that litigation is pointless because the government will not win.
“The Cabinet Office’s foot-dragging approach to the inquiry is costing public time and money.”
