Markus Andrews

Watch live as David Cameron questioned on Greensill lobbyingDavid Cameron is being grilled by MPs over his relentless efforts to secure government loans for the now collapsed financial firm Greensill Capital.Mr Cameron is appearing in public for the first time since the story broke in March. He is being questioned by parliament’s powerful Treasury Select Committee.Later today, the embattled former prime minister faces the Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Labour MP Meg Hillier.Elsewhere, Downing Street has said a county court judgement issued against Boris Johnson over an unpaid debt of £535 is “totally without merit”, Downing Street has said.On Wednesday Private Eye revealed a record existed for “Boris Johnson, 10 Downing Street” due to a debt that is still “unsatisfied” more than six months later.Records show the judgement was issued over a claim of alleged defamation against prime minister. No 10 says it will apply for an order to “set aside the default judgment, to strike out the claim and for a declaration that the claim is “totally without merit.”Show latest update

1620915732Cameron: Ex-PM denies he lobbied officials over fears he would lose out financially if firm went underMr Cameron has denied that he lobbied ministers and officials on behalf of Greensill Capital because he feared he would lose out financially if the firm went under.Treasury Committee chairman Mel Stride told Mr Cameron he had sent a “barrage” of texts and messages in the spring of last year when the pandemic broke.“Many people would conclude at the time of your lobbying your opportunity to make a large amount of money was under threat,” he said.Mr Cameron replied: “I have spent most of my adult life in public service. I believe in it deeply. I would never put forward something that I didn’t believe was absolutely in the interests of the public good.“I did not believe in March or April last year when I was doing this contact there was a risk of Greensill falling over.”Matt Mathers13 May 2021 15:221620915585SNP’s independence referendum bid now in the hands of lawyers, says Tory ministerThe SNP’s plan to legislate for a referendum on Scottish independence will be a matter for “law officers” to decide on, a Conservative cabinet minister has claimed.My colleague Adam Forrest reports: Matt Mathers13 May 2021 15:191620914773Cameron denies £60m figure, refuses to say how much he was set to gain from firm’s success”I was paid an annual amount, a generous annual amount, far more than what I earned as prime minister, and I had, shares, not share options but shares in the business, which vested over the period of time of my contract.”He continued: “I had a big economic investment in the future of Greensill, so I wanted the business to succeed, I wanted it to grow.””The fact that I have this economic interest in a serious economic interest that’s important, but I don’t think the amount is particularly germane to answering those questions, and as far as I’m concerned it’s a private matter.”Our politics editors Andrew Woodcock and Rob Merrick have more details: Matt Mathers13 May 2021 15:061620914279Cameron: Former PM confirms he attended Greensill board meetings before and during pandemicAlthough he was was not a director of Greensill Capital, Mr Cameron confirmed he had an open invitation to board meetings and attended regularly.When asked if he attended meetings up to and during the Covid-19 pandemic, and whether he took part in any discussions during this time, Mr Cameron said he did so but only spoke about “geopolitical matters and such like”.There were other board meetings, involving the firm’s credit and risk committees, that were for directors only, which he says he didn’t attend.Former PM “doesn’t recall” talking part in discussions on how the pandemic might affect Greensill. Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:571620913583The Independent’s Inside Politics newsletter: Sign up for your essential morning briefingWe’re living through another extraordinary period for British politics. Boris Johnson’s government is now mired in “sleaze” allegations, with several parliamentary inquiries set to pick apart claims of cronyism during the Covid crisis.Sign up for our daily newsletter here: Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:461620913209Cameron: It was never my intention to lobby the governmentMr Cameron said he was never employed by Greensill as a lobbyist and never intended to carry out such activites for the company, but that the Covid pandemic was a game-changer.He said that, in April last year, that he had “no sense at all” that the business was in danger of collapse.Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:401620912922Cameron: This is a ‘painful day’In his opening statement, former PM said it is a “painful day” to be virtually back in HoC in the circumstances.He said he was happy to cooperate with the committee and insisted he followed all the rules.Former PM says he wanted to carve out a career as lobbyist after life in No 10, as well as helping out with charitable causes.Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:351620912623‘I’m v free’: David Cameron’s texts to ministers and officialsDavid Cameron was once one of the most powerful men in the world, now he is “v free”…except for this afternoon.Here is a look back at just some of the texts he sent to ministers and officials while lobbying for Greensill.To Sir Tom Scholar, the Treasury’s most senior civil servant : “I am riding to the rescue with Supply Chain Finance with my friend Lex Greensill…See you with Rishi for an elbow bump or foot tap. Love Dc.”To Cabinet minister Michael Gove: “I know you are manically busy – and doing a great job, by the way (this is bloody hard and I think the team is coping extremely well. But do you have a moment for a word? I am on this number and v free. All good wishes Dc.”Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:301620911676Johnson will write letters of apology to Ballymurphy familiesBoris Johnson will apologise to the families of those shot dead by the Army fifty years ago in west Belfast.The prime minister is to write letters to the relatives of the ten people killed in what became known locally as the Ballymurphy Massacre.Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis made a public apology on behalf of the government in the House of Commons on Thursday.He said: “I want to put on record the government’s acknowledgment of the terrible hurt that has been caused to the families.“The events at Ballymurphy should never have happened. The families of those who were killed should never have had to experience the grief and trauma of that loss.”Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:141620911035Sleaze allegation over former Tory chair’s role in PPE contractLabour has accused the government of “contract cronyism” after it emerged that a former chair of the Conservative Party urged the Cabinet Office to buy PPE equipment from a private client at a time when he was advising a health minister.Our politics editor Andrew Woodcock has more details: Matt Mathers13 May 2021 14:03 More

Boris Johnson has said he does not believe that current surges in infections from variants of the Covid-19 virus will delay the end of lockdown on 21 June.Further restrictions to social and economic life are due to be relaxed on Monday, with the majority of curbs lifted altogether in June, allowing the public to gather inside with no limits for the first time since the onset of the pandemic.But there are concerns over the rise in infections with the so-called Indian variant of coronavirus, particularly in the Greater Manchester area.Speaking during a visit to a school in County Durham, Mr Johnson said: “We are anxious about – it has been spreading.”The prime minister said there would be meetings later on Thursday to discuss what to do, and that he was “ruling nothing out” when asked if local lockdowns were possible.“There are a range of things we could do, we want to make sure we grip it,” he said. “Obviously there’s surge testing, there’s surge tracing.But he added: “At the moment I can see nothing that dissuades me from thinking we’ll be able to go ahead on Monday and indeed on 21 June, everywhere, but there may be things we have to do locally and we will not hesitate to do them if that is the advice we get”.His remarks come as experts on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) were called to an urgent meeting to assess the threat of the the variant — B1617.2 — which is one of three mutations causing the spike in Covid infections in India.It was reported there are concerns among scientists that while England’s next stage of the roadmap on Monday will go ahead, with people allowed to meet inside in groups of six, the fourth and final step out of restrictions on 21 June could be delayed.According to official government figures — due to be updated on Thursday — 520 cases of the B1617.2 variant have been have been confirmed by officials tracking the data.Health officials have designated all three of the Indian Covid variants – known as B1617.1, B1617.2 and B1617.3 – as “under investigation”.Mr Johnson told reporters: “It’s a variant of concern, we are anxious about it. At the moment there is a very wide range of scientific opinion about what could happen.“We want to make sure we take all the prudential, cautious steps now that we could take, so there are meetings going on today to consider exactly what we need to do. There is a range of things we could do, we are ruling nothing out.” More

Government plans to introduce mandatory voter ID at polling stations in future elections have been described as “total b*****ks” by the former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson.Her frank remarks come amid controversy over the proposals – included in the Queen’s Speech – with civil liberties groups and senior MPs on both sides of the Commons warning it could erect barriers to individuals voting, particularly from marginalised groups.Speaking on ITV’s Peston programme, Ms Davidson, who recently stood down as an MSP at Holyrood and will soon join the House of Lords as a peer, said she “couldn’t believe it” when the policy came out, adding: “I honestly didn’t know what we were doing”.“I think they [government] can’t cite any evidence of it because I don’t think there’s any evidence to cite,” she insisted.Ms Davidson went on: “I think in terms of this particular part of the Queen’s Speech, I think it’s total b*****ks, and I think it’s trying to give a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, and that makes it politics as performance.”“I think that given where we are and the year we’ve had, we’ve got real problems to solve in this country, and the idea that this is some sort of legislative priority I think is for the birds.”Following the interview on Wednesday evening, Ms Davison posted on her Twitter account: “Apols for the language. But there are bigger threats from agents outside our borders than from someone who forgets to take their drivers’ licence (if they have one) to a polling station.”Her comments echo those of David Davis, the former Tory cabinet minister, who told The Independent the plans were an “illiberal solution in pursuit of a non-existent problem” that was putting barriers in the way of individual’s exercising their democratic rights. Mr Davis also urged the government to abandon the proposals, adding: “It’s pointless, it’s a waste of time, it’s a waste of ministerial effort and as I say it’s an illiberal solution in pursuit of a non-existent problem. And it will be expensive… for nothing”.Newly released research for the Cabinet Office suggested this week that around 98 per cent of voters held some form of photo identification, including documents which had expired.But the UK-wide study said this figure fell to 96 per cent when considering if recognisable ID was held – suggesting around two million people were at risk of missing out.According to data from the Electoral Commission, 595 cases of alleged voter fraud were investigated by police in 2019, with just four leading to a conviction and two individuals given a police caution.  The electoral watchdog concluded in the same year that the UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud” and that there “remains no evidence of large-scale electoral fraud”.The government has previously attempted to allay concerns over the issue, suggesting that people will be able to apply for a new free-of-charge “local electoral identity document” for those without passports or driving licences or other acceptable forms of ID.Earlier this week, No 10 also defended the plans, claiming: “We think identification to vote is a reasonable approach to combat the inexcusable potential for voter fraud”.Asked what evidence there was of a problem actually existing, the Downing Street spokesman said “there is a potential for fraud which is not acceptable”.“Everyone wants to maintain the integrity of our democracy and this would bring us in line with not only Northern Ireland but countries such as Canada, many European countries including France, the Netherlands, Sweden – all require a form of identification to vote.” More

Boris Johnson’s new independent ethics adviser has said he is ready to follow his predecessor in taking the “nuclear option” of resigning if the prime minister ignores his recommendations.Christopher Geidt said he intends by the end of this month to publish his advice to Mr Johnson on the controversial refurbishment of his Downing Street flat.The row over the flat is the biggest issue facing the Queen’s former private secretary following his appointment as independent adviser on ministerial interests on 28 April.He revealed that he was not approached to take up the position until late March. The post had been vacant following the resignation of predecessor Sir Alex Allan in response to his bullying findings against Priti Patel was overruled by Mr Johnson.Lord Geidt told the House of Commons Public Administration Committee that he will advise Mr Johnson on what declaration of interest, if any, he should make concerning renovations to the No 11 apartment he shares with fiancee Carrie Symonds. The bill for at least part of the work, reported to have cost as much as £200,000, is thought initially to have been covered by the Conservative Party or a wealthy donor before the PM paid for it himself.Any declaration will be included in the delayed ministerial register of interests, which was due to be released in December but is now intended to appear by the end of May, said Lord Geidt.He told the committee: “I am absolutely determined to ensure that a full list is published as quickly as possible. I’m determined that it should be published by the end of this month. I wish to propose that all cabinet ministers’ interests should be properly re-submitted.“I’ve been asked to make inquiry of the facts and circumstances of the refurbishment of the flat at Downing Street, and to advise the prime minister on his declaration of interest.”He made clear that he intends to publish his advice to the PM “alongside that declaration of interests”.Lord Geidt insisted that he was ready to “speak truth unto power” in his new role.“I’m absolutely determined to assert that I would be undertaking this role without fear or favour,” he told the committee.He added: “I need to ensure that I conduct this role to the very best of my ability and do all I can to ensure that it can radiate, for the purpose of public and parliamentary confidence, the necessary degree of independence.”Lord Geidt said that his predecessor’s resignation, after Mr Johnson overruled him and cleared Ms Patel in November, may have increased public confidence in the Downing Street standards system.“To an important degree, Sir Alex’s resignation, was itself a signal about the integrity of the appointment,” he told the MPs.And he added: “Sir Alex Allan only had one rather nuclear option, which was to resign. But equally … that itself sent a signal into the public square.“My hunch is that any prime minister would wish to avoid the regular resignations of independent advisers.”Pressed on whether he would be willing to resign if his advice was overruled or ignored, Lord Geidt said: “If it came to it, I could.”Lord Geidt said he hoped his role would enable him to promote good conduct in government, but said that ministers including the PM need to take the lead.“Good behaviour is a very difficult thing to legislate,” he said.But committee member Loyd Russell-Moyle said that his role risked being a “fig-leaf” because he cannot launch an investigation without the PM’s approval.Lord Geidt said that unlike earlier advisers, his terms of reference permit him privately to suggest the launch of inquiries into alleged standards breaches to the PM.But he acknowledged that if his recommendation of a probe was rejected, the matter will remain “behind closed doors”.Mr Russell-Moyle said the danger was that the adviser would be given a “there, there’ chat” with the prime minister over a cup of coffee but then be told not to press ahead with investigations.Lord Geidt said that he sought assurances before taking up the role that he would be able to bring concerns to the PM for possible investigation and that he would be able promptly to publish his advice on any inquiries which go ahead.He told MPs he did not see “any difficulties at all” in “dispassionately and impartially” advising Mr Johnson while simultaneously investigating him.Labour committee member John McDonnell said that Lord Geidt’s account of cabinet secretary Simon Case approaching him to consider role “sounds like a very old-school conversation in the civil service club when the port is passed around”. More

The universities minister has been slapped down by No 10 after saying a new ‘Free Speech Bill’ will permit Holocaust deniers to speak on campuses.Michelle Donelan sparked an outcry when she said universities will face a legal duty requiring them to allow in the likes of historian David Irving – with the threat of fines if they did not. “Obviously it would depend on what they are saying, whether they were straying into racism or straying into hate crimes,” Ms Donelan said.The minister was then pushed on whether Holocaust deniers would have the right to speak – and could demand compensation if blocked – because such denial is lawful in this country.“There is a difference between condoning and supporting something when standing up for free speech,” she replied, on BBC Radio 4.But, after the comments were widely criticised, Boris Johnson’s spokesman contradicted Ms Donelan, saying: “Holocaust denial is not something that the government would ever accept.”Asked if the prime minister agreed with the minister, the spokesman replied: “No” – and, asked if he believed Holocaust denial is antisemitic, he said: “Yes.”Ms Donelan’s comments came despite her recently criticising higher education institutions that have refused to back the international definition of antisemitism.“I urge all universities to adopt it. If not, then we will have to be forced into taking action to ensure that they do,” she told the Commons education committee.Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, has now directly threatened them with financial penalties if they continue to challenge the definition..“If universities ignore the issue, I have asked officials to consider options e.g. directing the Office for Students to impose a new registration condition or suspending funding,” he tweeted.Ministers have claimed the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill will encourage “open intellectual debate” and counter the “chilling effect of censorship on campus”.For the first time, student unions will be legally obliged to protect freedom of speech and could be taken to court by cancelled speakers.But universities have dismissed the new laws as unnecessary, warning of increased bureaucracy and insisting free-speech problems on campus are being hugely exaggerated.Ms Donelan later sought to clarify her comments on Twitter, saying: “Some people have asked me how this interacts with the government’s work to combat antisemitism.“Let me be clear antisemitism is abhorrent and will not be tolerated at our universities. This bill will protect and promote lawful free speech.“Universities will still need to adhere to the Equality Act, the Prevent Duty and ensure that speakers do not incite violence, harassment or hate crimes.” More

The SNP’s plan to legislate for a referendum on Scottish independence will be a matter for “law officers” to decide on, a Conservative cabinet minister has claimed.Nicola Sturgeon has challenged Boris Johnson to explain whether he would block Scottish government legislation to stage indyref2 – claiming it would be “outrageous” for the issue to end up in court.Alister Jack, the secretary of state for Scotland, suggested on Wednesday that a referendum on independence remained part of “reserved” powers held by the UK government.However, the minister said it would be up to the Scotland’s top law officers to decide whether any inyref2 bill put forward by Ms Sturgeon’s government was in the “scope” of devolved powers.SNP MP Pete Wishart challenged Mr Jack explain how No 10 would respond to the “inevitable” push for a referendum, after pro-indy parties boosted their majority at the Holyrood election.Mr Wishart, chair of the Commons Scottish Affairs Committee, told Mr Jack that indyref2 was about “respecting democracy” and the election results.Mr Jack responded: “If there is a bill that the Scottish parliament brings forward that is deemed by the Scottish law officers to be in scope, then the Lord Advocate, if he has approved that bill, that bill will then go the Advocate General for Scotland.”He added: “And it will be a matter for the law officers to decide whether or not that bill is in scope.”The minister also pointed to the terms of the agreement for the 2014 independence referendum – which saw the UK government grant a section 30 order (a provision in the Scotland Act 1998) for the Scottish government to stage a ballot. More

Labour has accused the government of “contract cronyism” after it emerged that a former chair of the Conservative Party urged the Cabinet Office to buy PPE equipment from a private client at a time when he was advising a health minister.Emails obtained by the Good Law Project campaign group and published in the Financial Times showed that Andrew Feldman discussed the possibility of contracts being awarded to Bunzl with a government official in March last year, shortly before the company received a £22.6m deal to supply goggles, masks and gowns to the Department for Health and Social Care.Lord Feldman, who co-chaired the Tory party under David Cameron’s leadership, was working in an unpaid role advising minister Lord Bethell at the time, and Bunzl was a client of his lobbying and PR firm Tulchan.The incident will fuel the row over “double-hatting”, sparked by the revelation that the government’s former chief procurement chief Bill Crothers was working for controversial company Greensill Capital at the same time as working as a senior civil service.Feldman defended his actions, telling the FT: “When I agreed to help at the start of the first lockdown, it was clearly a time of significant national crisis,. My sole motivation was to try to support the government and the NHS in protecting medical staff and saving the lives of patients.”But Labour chair Anneliese Dodds said: “Once again it’s clear there’s one rule for businesses with links to the Tories, and another for ordinary businesses that can’t get a hearing from government.“How many more of these instances of contract cronyism are lurking out there? The British public has a right to know.”She added: “Conservative chairs past and present are mired in scandal, which just goes to show that sleaze is at the heart of this government.”Emails obtained by the Good Law Project show Lord Feldman contacting Bunzl CEO Frank van Zanten on 22 March last year, to say he was hoping to “remedy” a historical issue which meant the company had been removed from the government’s approved suppliers list.Later the same day, he send a message to van Zanten, copying in Cabinet Office official Andrew Wood, to say that he had spoken to Wood about the opportunity for Bunzl to supply the government with equipment.A week later, on 30 March, he emailed Mr Wood warning that Bunzl was under pressure to sell its PPE products overseas and telling him: “We need to move quickly.” The £22.6m contract was confirmed on 3 April.Lawyer Jo Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, said the emails raised concerns.“An ex-Conservative party chair, who now runs a huge PR agency, walked into a role at the heart of this vast procurement process without any formal process,” he said. “He then spent his days chivvying officials to speed up a contract for a firm his agency represents.”An official at the DHSC said Lord Feldman had no involvement in the contract award process to Bunzl, which was decided by the department’s accounting officer.  The department said it did “proper due diligence” on all contracts. More

The row over the court judgment against Boris Johnson for an unpaid £535 debt has taken a bizarre twist, after it emerged it was for a claim of defamation.Yvonne Hobbs is reported to have launched multiple claims against the prime minister and public institutions – often sending copies of her complaints to the Queen, the BBC and Parliament.The information has raised questions about how the claim was approved by the online small claims court, when defamation cases are usually dealt with by senior judges in the High Court.The county court judgement – made six months ago – had appeared to be a fresh embarrassment for Mr Johnson has he faces multiple inquiries by standards’ watchdogs.The Electoral Commission is investigating into who originally paid for his flat renovations – while the parliamentary commissioner for standards is probing a luxury £15,000 Christmas holiday in the Caribbean.But Downing Street is confident that an application to strike out the debt judgement will be successful, describing it as “totally without merit.”No 10 was blindsided by the story – revealed by Private Eye magazine – but quickly made clear it was nothing to do with the controversy over his lavish flat makeover.Legal experts suggested it was a “default judgment”, issued when someone has not put up a defence to the claim issued against them.Generally, they are sent in the post, with three different correspondence – including a letter before claim, a final demand and then a claim form from the court.But it appears the correspondence was sent to 10 Downing Street rather than any property Mr Johnson owns, or 11 Downing Street, which is where his flat is.A file shows the claim was made by an Yvonne Hobbs against “The Rt Hon Boris Johnson” the reasons cited being “defamation” and “committed repeated defamation”.Under the small claims court procedure, anyone can make an official demand for another person or a business to pay them money owed, paying as little as £25 for an online claim.A No 10 spokesman said: “An application will be made for an order to set aside the default judgment, to strike out the claim and for a declaration that the claim is totally without merit.” More