Johnson and Sunak feud descends into warfare as they trade blows over resignation honours
The row between Mr Sunak and his predecessor descended into further acrimony
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The row between Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak today descended into a open warfare as the former PM accused his successor of ātalking rubbishā 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 ādo something I wasnāt prepared to doā 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 āmake promises to peopleā on the issue.
Mr Sunak claimed he was ānot prepared to do thatā because he didnāt think it was ārightā. Ramping up his message, he added: āIf people donāt like that, then tough.ā
But Mr Johnson responded hours later, saying that all Mr Sunak needed to do was ask Holac to ārenew their vettingā.
He said in a statement: āRishi 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.ā
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 ministerās 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: āBoris Johnson asked me to do something that I wasnāt prepared to do because I didnāt think it was right.
āThat was to either overrule the Holac (House of Lords Appointments Commission) committee or to make promises to people.
āNow, I wasnāt prepared to do that. I didnāt think it was right and if people donāt like that, then tough.
āWhen I got this job I said I was going to do things differently because I wanted to change politics and thatās what Iām doing.ā
After Mr Sunakās comments, an ally of Mr Johnson fired back by accusing Mr Sunak of having āsecretly blockedā a handful of peerages.
Downing Street later said Mr Sunak does not regret the comments he made at the event. A spokesman said: āHe was asked a direct question. He gave a clear answer.ā
There have been claims that Mr Johnson reached a āgentlemanās agreementā 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 Johnsonās 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 Johnsonās peerages submission. Michael Gove stressed on Monday that the āappropriate procedureā and the correct āprecedentā was followed.
Meanwhile Downing Street said it is is āentirely untrueā that Rishi Sunak or members of his No 10 team removed names from Boris Johnsonās peerages submission.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84e16/84e16e89ce2f44f7f9f79b3bdac1e9c0681d943d" alt="Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove said the āappropriate procedureā and the correct āprecedentā was followed"
Asked if anyone in No 10 spoke to the House of Lords Appointments Commission (Holac) before it made its redactions to Mr Johnsonās list, the Prime Ministerās official spokesman told reporters: āIt is entirely untrue to say that anyone from No 10 attempted to remove or change or alter Holacās list.ā
The official noted that āthis is a process for Holac to make a decisionā and said that āwhen it comes to peerages, the final list comes to the Prime Ministerā.
Asked whether Mr Sunak broke a deal with his predecessor under which he would have waved through the honours list ā as has been suggested by Mr Johnsonās camp ā the spokesman pointed to the Prime Ministerās comments on Monday morning, when he said Mr Johnson asked him to ādo something I wasnāt prepared to doā 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 Bewās 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 āpersonal decision to withdraw themselvesā.
The row came as the Privileges Committee met 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 Johnsonās Commons exit amid accusations of a āwitch huntā. But Downing Street has backed the committee, insisting is is ādoing exactly what Parliament askedā.
The prime ministerās spokesman said: āThis is a properly set-up committee that the House has voted to carry out their work ā¦ The government will in no way traduce or criticise the work of the committee.ā
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 ābiasā and likened it to a ākangaroo courtā.
The Privileges Committee, in response, said Mr Johnson āimpugned the integrity of the Houseā with his attack.
Meanwhile, as the row between Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak intensified, the former prime minister lashed out at the government for āfoot-draggingā with an attempt to stop his unredacted WhatsApp messages being released to the Covid inquiry.
The former prime minister said the governmentās judicial review against the inquiry is wasting āpublic time and moneyā and āfrustrating the inquiryās workā.
The Cabinet Office has launched a High Court challenge against inquiry chairwoman Baroness Hallettās request for the wholesale handover of Mr Johnsonās messages and notebooks from the pandemic.
The Cabinet Office says some of the information requested by the inquiry does not relate to the Governmentās handling of coronavirus and is āunambiguously irrelevantā.
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: āThe Cabinet Office has blocked me from directly sharing unredacted material with the inquiry ā despite my repeated attempts to do so.
āThe 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.
āThe Cabinet Officeās foot-dragging approach to the inquiry is costing public time and money.ā
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments