Rishi Sunak has dismissed calls for an investigation into claims Alister Jack broke the Ministerial Code by lobbying for a £150m “enhanced investment zone" to cover his constituency.
The SNP’s Tommy Sheppard wrote to the Prime Minister last month, asking that allegations be passed on to the Cabinet Office and Sir Laurie Magnus, the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests.
However, the government has said there is no case to answer.
Mr Sheppard said this was proof that Mr Sunak’s "promise of leading with integrity and accountability was nothing more than disingenuous bluster."
A UK Government source said the MP's complaint was simply not serious.
READ MORE: Ministerial Code row: Sunak urged to investigate Jack breach claim
The MP’s call for an investigation came after The Herald reported that the Scottish Secretary had been involved in negotiations around Stranraer and Cairnryan in his Dumfries and Galloway constituency being included as part of the new low tax, low regulation area for Northern Ireland, announced by the UK Government as part of the deal to restore power in Stormont.
Mr Jack appeared to reveal the extent of his involvement in the agreement during his appearance before the UK Covid Inquiry.
When asked to explain how business was recorded by UK minister, as an example, he said he had had conversations with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland “directly about including Stranraer and Cairnryan in an investment zone for Northern Ireland.”
The minister continued to say he had spoken to DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson and "then came back to speak to my office directly and inform them that I'm trying to have Stranraer and Cairnryan included in an investment zone for Northern Ireland.”
He then said his officials would “go back and cement what I think we have agreed."
In his letter to the Prime Minister, Mr Sheppard pointed to Section 1.3 (h) of the ministerial code which states: "Ministers in the House of Commons must keep separate their roles as minister and constituency member".
He also referenced Section 6.4 goes which says that “where ministers have to take decisions within their departments which might have an impact on their own constituencies, they must take particular care to avoid any possible conflict of interest".
READ MORE: Alister Jack accused of 'clear breach' of ministerial code
In his letter to the Prime Minister, Mr Sheppard who shadows the Scottish Secretary in the Commons, said Mr Jack’s involvement in the Investment Zone negotiations “appears to be a clear breach of the Ministerial Code".
Replying on Mr Sunak’s behalf, Baroness Lucy Neville-Rolfe, a Minister of State in the Cabinet Office, disagreed.
She said Ministers were “personally responsible for deciding how to act and conduct themselves in light of the Code.”
On keeping constituency interests separate, the peer said Mr Jack “was acting in his capacity as Secretary of State for Scotland in discussions about the Northern Ireland/Stranraer Investment Zone, which will bring a huge boost to jobs and the economy of the entire south-west of Scotland, strengthening Scotland’s economic ties with Northern Ireland and benefiting the whole UK.”
She also rejected that there was any “possible conflict of interest” adding that the Scottish Secretary “does not have any decision-making powers relating to the Investment Zone in his ministerial role.”
Mr Sheppard said: ” “This is further evidence that Sunak’s promise of leading with integrity and accountability was nothing more than disingenuous bluster.
“Time and time again, the Tories have rewritten the rules to stop one of their own from being investigated for breaking the ministerial code.
“It’s clear that the current system that is supposed to uphold standards in high office is woefully inadequate.
“The Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests should be truly independent with the power to initiate their own investigations into potential misconduct.
“Untimely though, the only way to escape the broken Westminster system and rampant Tory rule-breaking is to become an independent country.”
A UK Government source said: ‘This was never a serious complaint. Instead of throwing mud Mr Sheppard should be throwing his weight behind the Secretary of State’s efforts to boost the Scottish economy.’
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel