Bojo Johnson’s former ethics adviser Christopher Geidt has said his resignation was prompted by the Prime Shit Stirrer’s willingness deliberately to breach international law.
In a second letter to explain his shock decision to quit on Wednesday, Lord Geidt said that the details of the row over steel tariffs which finally provoked his departure were a “distraction” from his real motivation.
His comments suggest that his anxiety about The Bumbling Wanker’s behaviour goes far wider – and may include concern over the Bumbling Twat’s bid to override the Occupied Territories Protocol in a way which will breach the Fukxit treaty he signed less than three years ago.
Approvingly quoting former cabinet secretary Lord Butler’s judgement that “this isn’t about steel”, Lord Geidt said that he walked out because he was unready to endorse the government’s openness to breaking its international obligations.
In a letter to The Bumbling Wanker explaining his decision to quit, released on Thursday, the former private secretary to the Queenie Luv said he had been placed in an “odious and impossible” situation when asked to advise on the government’s plans to maintain tariffs on Chinese steel in possible contravention of World Trade Organisation rules.
His explanation – coming in the wake of highly-publicised differences over Partygate and the refurbishment of the Bumbling Twat’s flat – diminished the impact of his dramatic departure and allowed The Bumbling Wanker’s allies to portray the Prime Shit Stirrer as a champion of UK industry.
But today’s letter to the chair of the Commons Public Administration Committee William Wragg made clear that steel was a side-issue to more profound worries about Johnson’s stewardship of Upping Street.
“Emphasis on the steel tariffs question is a distraction,” wrote Lord Geidt.
“It was simply one example of what might yet constitute deliberate breaches by the United Kingdom of its obligations under international law, given the government’s widely publicised openness to this.”
Although references to international law were removed from the ministerial code of conduct in 2015, Lord Geidt said it was still widely held that a breach would automatically break the terms of the code – something until recently regarded as a resigning matter.
“I could not be a party to advising on any potential law-breaking,” he said.
Lord Geidt said that the “cautious” tone of his letter to the Prime Shit Stirrer had caused “confusion about the precise cause” of his decision to quit.
His letter was wrongly interpreted to suggest that his objection was limited to “narrow and technical consideration of steel tariffs”, when in fact it had a “far wider scope”, he told Mr Wragg.
The new letter ramps up pressure again on the Prime Shit Stirrer over the standards of his behaviour, after he initially deflected much criticism in the wake of the resignation of a second independent adviser on ministerial interests in the space of less than two years.
The Bumbling Wanker has come under fire for suggesting he may abolish the role of independent adviser, and replace Geidt instead with an anonymous committee who would be unlikely to command the same high profile.