BORIS Johnson has been told he could lose his taxpayer-funded lawyers if he continues to “undermine” the government’s position on the Covid-19 public inquiry.
Late last week, the former prime minister put pressure on the current Prime Minister after he handed over “all unredacted WhatsApps” from his phone directly to Baroness Hallett, the former appeal court judge presiding over the probe.
That came just hours after the UK Government launched legal action in a bid to see off the inquiry’s request for all messages, diaries and notebooks.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson offers to send unredacted Whatsapps to Covid inquiry
The government has argued that some of the information demanded is "unambiguously irrelevant."
But Mr Johnson said he was “unwilling” to let his material become “a test case for others.”
In a letter sent last week, and seen by the Sunday Times, the Cabinet Office told the ex-Tory leader they would only pick up the tab for his lawyers if he obeyed certain conditions.
"The funding offer will cease to be available to you if you knowingly seek to frustrate or undermine, either through your own actions or the actions of others, the government's position in relation to the inquiry unless there is a clear and irreconcilable conflict of interest on a particular point at issue."
The government department said Mr Johnson should not submit evidence until he had "applied any redactions" which the Cabinet Office had informed him were "needed before submission".
They also said he should run any witness statement past them first.
READ MORE: Asylum seekers will be expected to share hotel rooms
Immigration minister Robert Jenrick said it was “entirely up to the former prime minister how he co-operates with the inquiry”.
The Home Office minister told Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday: “If he wishes to send his documents or WhatsApp messages to them then he’s at liberty to do so.
“He can advance whatever arguments he wants to and make whatever statements he wishes in his witness statement to the inquiry.
“There’s absolutely no sense that the Government will restrict what Boris Johnson wants to say, but if you use taxpayer funds obviously you should make sure you’re using them appropriately.”
Allies of Mr Johnson believe the government is bringing the legal action because they worry it could set a precedent and the inquiry could soon come after the messages of serving ministers, including Rishi Sunak.
Mr Jenrick told Sky: “We want to hand over to the Covid Inquiry absolutely anything that has anything to do with Covid-19 or the purpose of the inquiry.
“Where there’s a point of difference is that we don’t think it’s sensible or reasonable to hand over documents or messages that have nothing whatever to do with Covid-19.”
As a former lawyer, he said, the “normal way to do this is to set reasonable parameters” but not to ask for things “wholly unrelated”.
He insisted the UK Government was not asking for “special treatment”.
“I hope this can be resolved indeed even before the matter gets to court,” he added.
READ MORE: Scottish Government 'misrepresented' Tennent's DRS concerns
The Cabinet Office insisted the letter to Mr Johnson was “intended to protect public funds.”
They told the BBC it had been sent last week, and the corporation reported that it had not been issued in response to any recent event.
Former culture secretary Nadine Dorries, a staunch ally of the former Tory leader, said it was “not a good look for the Government”.
This is not a good look for the Government. All evidence provided should be unfettered and not restricted by gov censorship - whatever form that may take. https://t.co/bBIufEK91C
— Rt Hon Nadine Dorries MP (@NadineDorries) June 3, 2023
Mr Johnson has so far not provided WhatsApp messages from before May 2021 because he needed a new phone after the celebrity gossip newsletter Popbitch pointed out that the number could be found with a quick Google.
Mr Johnson told Baroness Hallett he would like to hand over the data stored on his old device, but that he needed to make sure it could be done so securely.
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 here