Need to know: Downing Street flat debacle

Dominic Cummings’ allegation that Boris Johnson considered an “unethical, foolish and possibly illegal” plan to ask Conservative donors to fund a lavish flat refurbishment has put the spotlight on the PM and his Downing Street residence. Here’s what you need to know.

Which flat was refurbished?

Like several of his recent predecessors, Boris Johnson and his fiancée Carrie Symonds chose to live in the four-bedroom flat above Number 11 rather than the smaller two-bedroom residence above Number 10 when he became Prime Minister. The couple currently live in the flat with their young son, Wilfred.

The Grade 1 listed building is owned by the UK government, but prime ministers can live there while they are in power.

What kind of refurbishment was done?

Last year Johnson and Symonds asked contractors, who were working on other parts of Downing Street at the time, to refurbish the flat. According to Tatler, the couple wanted to transform the flat from Theresa May’s “John Lewis furniture nightmare” into a “high society haven”.

They are reported to have commissioned an expensive makeover in the style of the interior designer Lulu Lytle, whose work includes gold wallpaper and wrought-iron furnishings. 

Were they allowed to refurbish the flat?

Prime Ministers are allowed a public grant of up to £30,000 each year for the refurbishment of the flat.

No 11 was extensively refurbished by David and Samantha Cameron in 2011 at a cost of £30,000 and Tony and Cherie Blair also spent thousands on turning the space into a family home when they lived there.

But there are questions over how much Johnson and Symonds spent on their refurbishment. According to The Times, the final bill came in at just under £100,000, but there has been no official comment on the amount spent.

So who paid for the refurbishment?

Details of how much of the £30,000 allowance was spent during the 2020-21 financial year are not yet available but on Friday Cabinet Office Minister Lord True said painting, sanding and floorboards work had been done by long-standing Downing Street contractors. In an answer to a written question, Lord True added: “Any costs of wider refurbishment in this year have been met by the Prime Minister personally.”

But there are questions over whether this money originally came from another source – a loan or party donation – and the Prime Minister then paid it back.

When the bill for the refurbishment came in, the PM is said to have been deeply concerned over the cost. The Times reported that he appealed to the Conservative Party co-chairman Ben Elliot to see if a donor could be found to make up the shortfall — and engaged his chief of staff, Lord Udny-Lister, to try to “sort” the problem.

Last month, the Daily Mail reported that the flat was paid for by a “tangled web” which involved “a payment of around £60,000 from Tory Party coffers to the Cabinet Office, which is responsible for maintaining Downing Street, to pay for expensive items” and “a payment of the same amount from Lord Brownlow to Conservative HQ to reimburse the Party”.

The Mail also reported that the Conservatives planned to state publicly that the money did not come from Party HQ or Lord Brownlow, but rather from a newly established ‘Downing Street Trust’ – even though the bill was allegedly settled months ago by Lord Brownlow and there have been no announcements about this trust being set up.

Appearing on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show this weekend, Trade Secretary Liz Truss refused to answer repeated questions about whether a Tory donor initially provided the money for the refurbishments.

What rules might Johnson have broken?

Last week, Cummings alleged that Johnson planned to have donors “secretly pay” for the work on his flat – saying the proposal had been “unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations if conducted in the way he intended”.

The full facts are yet to be established. It is unclear whether the invoice from the Cabinet Office was paid initially by Conservative HQ — or if it was still outstanding when Johnson paid the money himself. Although leaked emails show that Brownlow intended to make a donation, it is also not known whether he did make the payments.

However, if Johnson is found to have asked a Conservative donor to personally to fund the cost of his interior decorating, he would potentially be in breach of the ministerial code, which states that ministers must: “Scrupulously avoid any danger of an actual or perceived conflict of interest between their ministerial position and their private financial interests”.

Additionally, all MPs including the Prime Minister must declare in the Commons Register of Interests within 28 days any cash or other benefit from outside sources which could influence their actions. The PM’s entry in the register contains no mention of any payment or other help towards meeting the cost of the refit of his flat.

If it emerges that the Conservative Party solicited the donation for the flat but planned to record it with the Electoral Commission as a political donation then this could have serious legal ramifications for the Party. It could also potentially put the PM in breach of parliamentary rules, which require any such donations to be declared.

Johnson could also run into tax issues if it turns out that the estimated £60,000 came from a Conservative Party donor and was paid into a financial trust without the tax authorities being informed.

What happens next?

Despite a No 10 spokesperson insisting the government and ministers have “acted in accordance with the appropriate codes of conduct and electoral law”, there are still questions to be answered.

Labour has called for an inquiry and asked the PM to reveal the full amount that was spent on the flat and who paid for it in the first place. 

The Electoral Commission said it was working to establish whether any funds relating to the renovations fell within its remit of political donations, and therefore needed to be published, while a source from HMRC told the i that they are set to seek “clarification” from Johnson on where the £58,000 to pay for the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat came from and whether it should have been declared.