UK Politics

The launch of a Metropolitan Police investigation into alleged lockdown-breaching at Downing Street is set to delay the publication of the findings of a separate inquiry by civil servant Sue Gray.Ms Gray had been expected to publish her report within the coming days, but she will now pause work on all of the alleged parties which are covered by the police inquiry.The Whitehall mandarin can continue looking into events which are not deemed by the Met to merit criminal investigation, and could produce a separate report dealing only with these less controversial gatherings.The Cabinet Office said Ms Gray’s probe was “continuing” and she is in contact with the Metropolitan Police, but there was no official confirmation of the date she will eventually pass her report to Boris Johnson.The terms of reference for the Gray inquiry state that if her Cabinet Office team unearths any evidence of “behaviour that is potentially a criminal offence”, they must refer it to the police and their work “may be paused”.Downing Street confirmed that the Gray team have been passing information to police throughout, but it was not clear whether a particular piece of recent evidence prompted the Met’s decision to step in. Commissioner Cressida Dick’s bombshell announcement may buy the prime minister a little time, by delaying the flood of letters of no confidence from Tory MPs which had been expected when Ms Gray’s report landed.If those letters hit the crucial threshold of 54, they could have triggered a vote on his future as prime minister as early as this week.But it presents an even greater nightmare for the prime minister, as he faces the prospect of being interviewed, handed a fixed penalty notice or even being charged with breaking the law.It would be the first time that a serving prime minister has been interviewed as a suspect by police, though Tony Blair was interviewed as a witness in the cash-for-honours affair.The question for many Conservative MPs will now be whether they continue to hold off on forcing a confidence ballot in Mr Johnson’s leadership until after the police probe is wrapped up, potentially in some months’ time.Some will argue that the prime minister deserves the right to argue his case and should not be deemed guilty until investigations into his role are complete.But others are likely to conclude that the interests of the party and the country rest in resolving the uncertainty over his position more quickly by putting him to an immediate vote of the Conservative parliamentary party.If they can muster the necessary 54 letters, Mr Johnson would need the support of more than half his MPs – 180 votes – to remain as leader and prime minister. But this would be a significantly more difficult hurdle to clear with police investigation hanging over his head.The Met Police investigation is a far more fearsome prospect for the PM than Ms Gray’s inquiry.The terms of reference for the Whitehall mandarin are to “establish swiftly a general understanding” of the nature of the gatherings at No 10 and other government departments, including attendance, the setting and the purpose, with reference to adherence to the guidance in place at the time.As well as setting out the facts about the events, she could “if required” establish whether individual disciplinary action is warranted.Her report is due to go direct to the prime minister, who will himself decide whether any disciplinary action is needed and whether to call in his independent ethics adviser Lord Geidt to look at possible breaches of the ministerial code of conduct.By contrast, officers in the police inquiry could determine that a fixed penalty notice is required or could even, if the evidence gathered merits it, pass a file to the Crown Prosecution Service for a court case. With the involvement of the police, what little control Mr Johnson still had over the progress of the partygate affair seems to have slipped from his hands. More

Sue Gray’s inquiry into No 10 parties will carry on, despite the police announcing its own probe into the scandal – but its report is expected to be delayed.The Cabinet Office made clear the investigation – which is likely to determine whether Boris Johnson survives in power – is ongoing, despite suggestions it would be “paused”.However, it may not emerge for several weeks, while the police carry out their own inquiries, having been expected to be released at the end of this week, prolonging the agony for the Tory party.“The investigation being carried out by Sue Gray is continuing. There is in ongoing contact with the Metropolitan Police Service,” the Cabinet Office said.The statement came after Mr Johnson suffered the enormous blow of the Metropolitan Police announcing an investigation – after months of refusing to get involved.Most significantly, it has acted after receiving evidence from Ms Gray herself that she believes breaches of Covid rules may have taken place during lockdowns – despite the prime minister’s denials.The senior civil servant’s terms of reference stated that her inquiry “may” be paused if the police stepped in and Downing Street had briefed that it would be.The Gray and Met verdicts will determine whether 54 Conservative MPs submit letters demanding a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, the number required to trigger it.The Met had faced fierce criticism for sitting on the sidelines, arguing it did not investigate alleged breaches of coronavirus rules retrospectively.But, at a meeting of London Assembly’s Police and Crime Committee, the commissioner Cressida Dick said “We have a long-established and effective working relationship with the Cabinet Office, who have an investigative capability.“As you well know they have been carrying out an investigation over the last few weeks.“What I can tell you this morning is that, as a result of the information provided by the Cabinet Office inquiry team and, secondly, my officers’ own assessment, I can confirm that the Met is now investigating a number of events that took place at Downing Street and Whitehall in the last two years in relation to potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations.”Labour announced it had secured an urgent question, to drag a government minister to the Commons despatch box about the latest dramatic development.“With Boris Johnson’s Downing Street now under police investigation, how on earth can he think he can stay on as prime minister?” asked Angela Rayner, the party’s deputy leader.Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, welcomed the investigation, saying:: “I have been clear that members of the public must be able to expect the highest standards from everyone, including the prime minister and those around him.“No one is above the law. There cannot be one rule for the government and another for everyone else.” More

Grant Shapps has undermined Boris Johnson’s defence of his No 10 birthday party during lockdown, appearing to admit it broke Covid rules and saying: “I don’t seek to defend it.”The transport secretary piled pressure on the prime minister – as Downing Street tried to justify the June 2020 event – by saying he must own up “where he has transgressed”.Mr Shapps said it was up to the civil servant Sue Gray to decide if the party was “appropriate”, but added: “I’m furious with everybody who broke the rules.”Many people had broken lockdown rules “perhaps unwittingly,” he argued, but he said: “It’s quite right that that’s investigated and the prime minister apologises where he has transgressed.”The comments came after other cabinet ministers disputed whether the event – at which Mr Johnson was presented with a cake and up to 30 people sang Happy Birthday – was a party.At the time, indoor social gatherings were banned, yet staff enjoyed picnic food and cake for 30 minutes – and the interior designer arranging Mr Johnson’s flat refurbishment, Lulu Lytle, was there.No 10 has defended the party, saying: “A group of staff working in No. 10 that day gathered briefly in the Cabinet Room after a meeting to wish the prime minister a happy birthday. He was there for less than ten minutes.”But the Covid regulations expert and QC Adam Wagner warned: “It’s an indoor social gathering – it lasted 30 mins and the PM apparently stayed for 10.“Pre-arranged in a particular room and food was bought. It’s obviously not within the rules and nobody from the government at the time would have said for a moment it was.”ITV News also claimed that, the same evening of 19 June, “family friends were hosted upstairs in the prime minister’s residence” in a further breach of the rules.But Downing Street denied that allegation, saying: “This is totally untrue. In line with the rules at the time, the prime minister hosted a small number of family members outside that evening.”Ms Gray is believed to have already been aware of the latest allegations, which means her report – expected at the end of this week – may not be delayed further.Its verdict will be crucial in determining whether 54 Conservative MPs submit letters demanding a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, the number required to trigger it.Mr Shapps, speaking on Sky News, appeared to shift the blame onto Carrie Johnson, saying: “I don’t seek to defend it. This is for Sue Gray to decide on whether this was appropriate, she’ll make the recommendations.”I think we can be pretty clear that the prime minister didn’t present the cake to himself.“This is somebody coming in with that cake and I’ve explained to you that I’m furious with everybody who broke the rules.” More

Boris Johnson’s future hangs in the balance as Tory MPs await the findings of a inquiry by Sue Gray into Downing Street parties during Covid restrictions.The investigation into the gatherings reportedly obtained an email last week showing that an aide to the PM was warned that the now infamous garden bash of 20 May 2020 was against the rules.The email, and reports of at least 12 other alleged rule-breaking parties, are being investigated internally by a senior civil servant Ms Gray, who has been tasked with establishing the facts of what happened at each.The Daily Telegraph reported on Monday that police officers guarding Downing Street had given “extremely damaging” statements to Ms Gray’s inquiry, raising fresh questions about why the Met did not investigate alleged lockdown breaches at the time.Over the weekend, The Sunday Times said the scope of the probe had been widened to include alleged parties in the flat the PM shares with wife Carrie and their two children above No 11 Downing Street.The Independent, meanwhile, revealed claims by officials working in No 10 that they held back information from Ms Gray’s investigation into the partygate scandal due to a “culture of fear” surrounding the probe.On 8 December last year, the prime minister, who is facing calls to resign over the matter, appointed Ms Gray to look into the reports after Simon Case, the cabinet secretary and the UK’s most senior mandarin, recused himself from the investigation as it emerged a gathering had taken place in his office.Ms Gray, the second permanent secretary at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities – who previously worked in Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team – has a fearsome reputation for pulling no punches when it comes to wrongdoing.Her probe does not have the same powers as a judge-led or public inquiry. Some believe the conclusions in the former pub landlord’s report could be written in such a way as to suggest to Mr Johnson, who is fighting for his political life over the ‘partygate’ scandal, that it is last orders and he should resign.According to the Institute for Government thinktank, it is unlikely she will explicitly call for Mr Johnson to quit or rule on whether or not he breached the ministerial code in his responses to the party reports in the House of Commons.When the terms of reference for the investigation were set (by the PM) there was no concrete date for its publication and it has apparently been delayed on at least one occasion after fresh allegations emerged and the scope of the investigation widened.Several news outlets, including The Daily Telegraph, reported that Ms Gray had been planning to publish the findings of her investigation last week.Subsequent reports said it could be released this week, although there are now creeping doubts about this. The Cabinet Office would not be drawn on questions about the date of publication when approached for comment by The Independent.Dominic Raab, the justice secretary, refused to confirm to the BBC’s Sunday Morning Show that the report would be published in full.“It…will be for the prime minister to decide. But … there will be full transparency,” he said. “He has said he will come back to the Commons and make a statement, so there will be full scrutiny.”Labour is demanding that the probe be released in full “with all accompanying evidence.”Angela Rayner, the party’s deputy leader, said the PM cannot be allowed to “cover up or obscure any of the truth” of what happened at the drinks gatherings.”He [Mr Johnson] has insisted on a hugely protracted internal probe to tell him which parties he attended and what happened in his own home,” she said.”The Sue Gray report must be published in its entirety with all accompanying evidence.”Allies of the PM, including Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, have repeatedly called for patience from colleagues calling for the PM to resign over the affair, saying MPs should give the PM space until Ms Gray’s report is published.Mr Johnson has himself repeatedly referred to the investigation when being asked to answer further questions on partygate.Government whips were last week engaged in frantic efforts to delay a potential no confidence vote in Mr Johnson as back bench Tory MPs became increasingly restless over his handling of the affair.The PM appeared on Sky News last Tuesday to defend himself against claims by Dominic Cummings, his former chief aide, that he was in fact made aware that the 20 May 2020 party broke the rules. Mr Cummings also accused the PM of lying to parliament, which would be a breach of the ministerial code and therefore usually a resigning matter, which he denies.”I’m saying categorically that nobody told me, nobody said this was something that was against the rules, doing something that wasn’t a work event because frankly, I can’t imagine why it would have gone ahead, or it would have been allowed to go ahead if it was against the rules,” Mr Johnson said in his response.But the PM was then criticised for refusing to accept responsibility for the rules he had himself set and the response reportedly triggered a fresh wave of no confidence letters going in to Sir Graham Brady, chair of the powerful 1922 Committee.Mr Cummings is expected to give evidence to the inquiry this week.Some rebel MPs claimed that the no confidence vote threshold of 54 letters would be reached by the end of Wednesday, but this never transpired. Allies of the PM subsequently briefed news outlets that the defection of Christian Wakeford to the Labour party earlier in the day had “calmed” the party and made rebels “think twice” about submitting letters.Infighting over Mr Johnson’s future broke out into the open in the Commons on Thursday as MPs plotting to topple the PM accused whips of “blackmailing” them to vote with the government.William Wragg, a senior Tory MP, chair of the public administration committee — and one of those calling for Johnson to resign over the partygate scandal — was first out of the blocks to make the incendiary claims, saying that some of his colleagues had been threatened with funding cuts if they didn’t vote in a specific way. Just a few hours later Christian Wakeford, who defected to the Labour Party on Wednesday and is also calling for the PM to go, stepped forward to tell the BBC that whips had threatened to axe funding for a school in his constituency if he did not support the government on voting against free school meals.Mr Wragg is expected to bring these allegations to the Metropolitan Police this week. More

Downing Street staff held a birthday party for Boris Johnson inside No 10 in June 2020 despite Covid lockdown rules banning all indoor socialising, according to fresh claims.The prime minister’s wife Carrie Johnson led the surprise gathering on the afternoon of 19 June which featured up to 30 people, ITV News reported on Monday evening.She is said to have led staff in a chorus of happy birthday, before well-wishers enjoyed picnic food from M&S at the event held just after 2pm.The Independent has seen evidence which suggests that Mr Johnson had a birthday cake with candles which he blew out after attendees finished singing happy birthday.A No 10 spokeswoman confirmed that a group of staff had “gathered briefly” in the Cabinet Room “to wish the prime minister a happy birthday”, adding: “He was there for less than ten minutes.”Downing Street did not deny Mr Johnson had a birthday cake and blew out candles, but instead referred to their previous statement.The Independent has separately been told by sources that a group joined Mr and Ms Johnson in their flat the same evening, as first reported by ITV – a claim denied by No 10.“This is totally untrue. In line with the rules at the time, the prime minister hosted a small number of family members outside that evening,” a Downing Street spokeswoman added.Interior designer Lulu Lytle – the person later caught up in the scandal over the complex funding of the PM’s flat refurbishment – also attended the afternoon birthday gathering, ITV reported.A spokeswoman for Soane Britain, the luxury designer co-founded by Ms Lytle, said she had been in Downing Street on June 19 working on the refurbishment.“Lulu was not invited to any birthday celebrations for the prime minister as a guest. Lulu entered the cabinet room briefly as requested, while waiting to speak with the prime minister,” said the spokeswoman.Mr Johnson was also said to have been joined for food and cake by Martin Reynolds, his under-fire principal private secretary, as well as No 10 special advisers, operations and events staff.Sir Keir Starmer responded to the latest claim of a rule-breaking party by saying Mr Johnson had become a “national distraction”, adding: “He’s got to go”.The Labour leader added: “We’ve got a prime minister and a government that spends their whole time mopping up sleaze and deceit, meanwhile while millions of people are struggling to pay their bills.”Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said it was time for the “disgraced” prime minister to “save the country even more pain and resign”.He added: “It is clear now the Sue Gray inquiry is not fit for purpose. The Met must investigate this to deliver justice for millions who sacrificed so much during this pandemic.”One Tory MP – who has been considering whether to send a letter of no-confidence in Mr Johnson to the 1922 Committee of backbenchers – told The Independent the claims made the PM’s position more precarious.“There’s a sense of shock about these allegations. A lot of us are still getting our heads around it. I think many MPs will still wait to hear what Sue Gray says. But it’s going to make it more difficult for him to survive.”In June 2020 all social gatherings indoors were still banned under Covid laws. Mr Johnson had asked the public to “show restraint and respect the rules” during a press conference nine days before his birthday gathering.Jo Goodman, co-founder of Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice, said the latest claim was “completely sickening” and “though we’re not even surprised any more, it still brings fresh pain.”She added: “Every day and every fresh scandal pours salt on the wounds of the hundreds of thousands who have lost loved ones – if he had any decency he would do what we and the country is calling for him to do and go.” However, culture secretary Nadine Dorries, a staunch ally of Mr Johnson, appeared to question whether the birthday gathering would have broken the rules in place at the time.“So, when people in an office buy a cake in the middle of the afternoon for someone else they are working in the office with and stop for ten minutes to sing happy birthday and then go back to their desks, this is now called a party?” she tweeted.Following the latest allegations, many people on Twitter shared a letter Mr Johnson wrote to a seven-year-old girl in March 2020 after she had delayed her own birthday party because of Covid rules. “Josephine sets a great example to us all,” the PM tweeted. The latest allegation came as senior civil servant Sue Gray continues to complete the inquiry into a series of claims of rule-breaking parties in No 10 and Whitehall departments.Her report – which could prove critical for the PM’s political survival – was expected to be published this week. But it was not immediately clear whether the latest allegation will further delay its publication, or whether Ms Gray had been aware of the birthday event.On Monday night, The Guardian reported claims that Ms Gray was expected to make deeply critical recommendations on overhauling No 10’s operation, after uncovering “appalling evidence of mismanagement” at the heart of Downing Street.It came after Dominic Cummings claimed evidence was being kept from the investigation because staff fear it will be seen by Mr Johnson.The former Downing Street adviser suggested on Monday that the fear of reporting to Ms Gray officially meant that further evidence – including photographs – will keep leaking after she publishes her report.“I know others are very worried about handing things to the Cabinet Office because they know the PM will see everything SG [Sue Gray] collects,” Mr Cummings said in his latest blog post.It follows The Independent’s exclusive report that officials at No 10 have held back information due to a “culture of fear” surrounding the probe.Three sources said they had not divulged messages and pictures on their phones after a senior member of staff told them to remove anything which could be damaging following the first party revelations. More

A Boris Johnson tweet praising a seven-year-old girl for cancelling her birthday party during the first lockdown has resurfaced, following claims the prime minister celebrated his 56th birthday with an illegal gathering just weeks later.Mr Johnson is alleged to have been given a birthday cake during the gathering of a group of around 30 people in the Cabinet Room on the afternoon of 19 June.Indoor gatherings were banned in England at the time, meaning that such an event would have breached the government’s own coronavirus restrictions.The reported bash took place just three months after Josephine, 7, sent the prime minister a letter on her birthday, which fell at the start of the first national lockdown.“I think mummy and daddy might have to cancel my party but I don’t mind because I want everybody to be OK,” she wrote to Mr Johnson.In a response dated 21 March 2021, the prime minister said he was sorry to hear about the cancelled party but was glad the 7-year-old was respecting the rules.“We have all got to do our bit to protect the NHS and save lives, and that is exactly what you are doing, so well done!” he said.Mr Johnson added that she could “definitely” have a party once Covid-19 had been “sent packing”.The prime minister later tweeted both letters under the hashtag #BeLikeJosephine as part of the government’s appeals for the public to stay at home.The latest partygate allegation means that Mr Johnson is likely to face even more pressure to resign, both from his own MPs and from opposition parties.The Independent has seen evidence which suggests that Mr Johnson had a birthday cake with candles at the 19 June event, which he blew out after attendees finished singing happy birthday.A No 10 spokeswoman confirmed that a group of staff had “gathered briefly” in the Cabinet Room “to wish the prime minister a happy birthday”, adding: “He was there for less than ten minutes.”Downing Street did not deny Mr Johnson had a birthday cake and blew out candles, but instead referred to their previous statement.ITV News also reported family friends were hosted upstairs in the prime minister’s flat for an event later that evening – a claim denied by No 10.Carrie Johnson, his wife, is said to have organised the 19 June 2020 get-together, with guests thought to include Lulu Lytle, the designer behind the controversial luxury revamp of the Johnsons’ Downing Street flat.Later that day, family friends were hosted upstairs in their resident, the report claimed.A spokeswoman for Soane Britain, the luxury designer co-founded by Ms Lytle, said she had been in Downing Street on June 19 working on the refurbishment.“Lulu was not invited to any birthday celebrations for the prime minister as a guest. Lulu entered the cabinet room briefly as requested, while waiting to speak with the prime minister,” said the spokeswoman. More

A Whitehall watchdog has voiced concern over a Conservative MP’s ability to arrange direct contact for a private pharmaceutical company with the minister in charge of the UK’s vaccine rollout.Eric Pickles, who chairs the committee monitoring the “revolving door” between government and business, said there was “reasonable concern” that Steve Brine was able to secure engagement for Sigma Pharmaceuticals to Nadhim Zahawi only because of his former position as a minister in the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).And he warned he was “growing increasingly concerned” at the number of ex-ministers who are “not sufficiently clear” about the rules, laws and standards of behaviour required of them when taking up business appointments after leaving office.Lord Pickles, the chair of the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba), said that Mr Brine, who was paid £19,992 a year by Sigma for 96 hours of work, failed to seek advice on an outside role until after he had taken up the job, in a breach of the rules.And he said that the Winchester MP then asked Mr Zahawi, who was then vaccines minister, to take part in a webinar in February 2021 organised by the firm and hosted by Mr Brine.In a letter to Cabinet Office minister Stephen Barclay, released today, Lord Pickles said he had no doubt that Mr Brine believed contacting the government on Sigma’s behalf was “appropriate”.But he added: “I consider there is a reasonable concern that his direct engagement with the then minister for Covid vaccine deployment during the pandemic was only made available to Sigma as a direct result of Mr Brine’s time as a minister at the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC).“I do not consider it was in keeping with the letter or the spirit of the Government’s rules for a former minister at DHSC to contact a minister with responsibility for health on behalf of a pharmaceutical company which pays him”.In the documents, Mr Brine said Mr Zahawi had been aware the event was being hosted by him when the minister agreed to attend. He said it was a public event, broadcast live on YouTube, which gave the minister an opportunity to update community pharmacists on the vaccine drive.Former health secretary Matt Hancock also took part in one of the webinars hosted by Mr Brine in June 2021.Mr Brine admitted he had “made a mistake, by a few weeks” in not consulting the body before taking up the job and said he could “only apologise again for poor admin on my part”.He said his interests were properly registered and that “no lobbying on behalf of Sigma took place” but Lord Pickles said these were different rules and that “it is a former minister’s personal responsibility to understand” which guidelines they must abide by.Mr Brine, who was a health minister between 2017 and 2019, added that his role with Sigma ended in November 2021.But in a letter to Cabinet Office minister Steve Barclay, Lord Pickles said he was “growing increasingly concerned that not all former ministers of the Crown are sufficiently clear on the various standards of behaviour, rules and legislation that are incumbent on them.”Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner, who wrote to Lord Pickles about the case, said: “From the revolving door to crony contracts, the scandals just keep mounting for a Conservative Party mired in sleaze from the prime minister down.“Even the government’s in-house committee is ‘increasingly concerned’ about the behaviour of former Tory ministers and has called on them to act.“Labour will ban ministers for at least five years after they leave office and create a genuinely independent watchdog to enforce the rules, ending the days that Tory politicians could profit from privileged access, information and taxpayers’ money. Enough is enough.”Mr Brine said: “At the outset of the biggest vaccination programme in our history I wanted to give the vaccine minister a chance to thank a vital part of the workforce but I understand the event has caused concern and as such accept entirely Acoba’s decision.” More

Boris Johnson is coming under growing pressure over alleged Islamophobia within his government, after submitting to demands for an inquiry into a minister’s claim she was sacked because of her “Muslimness”.The Muslim Council of Britain questioned the independence of the internal inquiry ordered by the PM, which will be conducted by civil servants rather than the Equality and Human Rights Commission, while Labour called for the investigation to be handed over to No 10 ethics adviser Lord Geidt.Mr Johnson faced demands to give evidence to the inquiry to explain why he did not order an investigation when Tory MP Nusrat Ghani first approached him in 2020 to complain she had been discriminated against.Meanwhile, an imam appointed to lead an official process to draw up a definition of Islamophobia told The Independent that he had received no “meaningful engagement” from ministers in years.Qari Asim said that, after being commissioned in 2019, the work “didn’t really start” and letters to ministers went unanswered. Ministers are to be grilled on his complaints in the House of Commons on Tuesday.The EHRC said it would consider the findings of the Ghani inquiry in the context of the action plan drawn up following the 2021 Singh inquiry into discrimination within the Conservative Party, and did not rule out the use of legal powers if it feels that progress is too slow.Ms Ghani said on Sunday that when she lost her job as a transport minister in a 2020 reshuffle, she was told her “Muslim woman minister status was making colleagues feel uncomfortable”.Chief whip Mark Spencer later identified himself as the person accused of making the remarks, but said: “These accusations are completely false and I consider them to be defamatory.”Ms Ghani – who was the first female Muslim minister in the House of Commons – welcomed the announcement of the inquiry, which is to be conducted by the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team.But there was an immediate row over the terms of reference to be followed by investigators. The chair of the Commons Women and Equalities Committee told The Independent that the wording was “key”, while Ms Ghani said it was vital for them to include “all that was said in Downing Street and by the whip”.But the Cabinet Office said that the investigation was being carried out under the general provisions of Section 1.4 of the ministerial code of conduct, which allows the PM to ask the department “to investigate the facts of the case” in any alleged breach, and that there were no specific terms of reference.The Muslim Council of Britain said it wanted to see terms imposed along the lines demanded by Ms Ghani, and questioned the independence of an internal inquiry.“This investigation is well overdue,” said a spokesperson. “Nevertheless, what we really need now is a truly independent inquiry with definitive terms of reference, run by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.”The head of the Conservative Muslim Forum, Lord Sheikh, said there was no reason why Mr Johnson could not immediately clear up whether Ms Ghani’s dismissal was due to “her incompetence” or “other reasons”.Lord Sheikh told BBC Radio 4: “The report must be made public in full. I don’t want a scenario where bits of the report are truncated. And if any anyone is found to have behaved badly, that person must be held to account.”No 10 has refused to commit to publishing the inquiry’s findings and has rebuffed Labour calls for Mr Spencer to be investigated under the ministerial code.Quizzed on a hospital visit, Mr Johnson declined to back Mr Spencer, saying he was “very glad” there was an inquiry under way but adding: “We must wait and see what the investigation produces.”No 10 distanced itself from comments from Tory MP Michael Fabricant, who dismissed Ms Ghani’s complaint as “lame” because “she’s hardly someone who’s obviously a Muslim”. Mr Johnson’s spokesperson said: “The PM would not agree that someone’s religion would determine their appearance.”Women and Equalities Committee chair and Tory MP Caroline Nokes told The Independent: “I am pleased the PM is taking this seriously and has listened to those supporting Nus’s request for an independent inquiry. Obviously the terms of reference are key, but I welcome this as a positive step.”And Tory peer Sayeeda Warsi – the Conservatives’ first Muslim minister – said it was important that the inquiry sends out a message to British Muslims that “you are welcome within this party and you will play your full part and your Muslimness will not make a difference”.But Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesperson Layla Moran said Mr Johnson had ignored Ms Ghani’s demand for an inquiry two years ago, and was only acting now because the issue had surfaced in the media.“We now need assurances that this inquiry will question Boris Johnson himself, and find out why no action was taken when these extremely serious allegations were first made,” said Ms Moran. “This is a case of potentially illegal discrimination at the very heart of the government. It is shameful that it seems to have been simply swept under the carpet.”And Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner wrote to Lord Geidt, urging him to ask the prime minister to commission a formal investigation into a possible breach of the ministerial code by Mr Spencer.“A full investigation on this is absolutely necessary for anyone to feel that our democracy is safe from racism and discrimination, and not least for the millions of Muslim people in Britain who need confidence that our politics is not harbouring Islamophobia,” said Ms Rayner.An EHRC spokesperson said: “Discrimination is unacceptable in all workplaces, whether in the private sector or in government. Allegations of discrimination should be treated seriously by employers, and we welcome the announcement that the Cabinet Office are doing so.“We will consider any findings from the Cabinet Office inquiry. If we are not satisfied with progress, we will not rule out the use of our legal powers.” More