Boris’s Chief of Staff, Dan Rosenfield, has come under renewed fire from government insiders today. On Saturday The Times published a damning profile on the “demoralised” state of No. 10, laying bare the now gaping rift within the Downing Street hierarchy. Multiple sources tell Guido the piece was on the money…
Following Cummings’s departure from Downing Street, No. 10 was desperate to hire a new chief of staff who would bring some order to the top of government. While one source tells Guido Rosenfield has sped up some decision making (“Dom sat on things for too long”) there are now persistent accusations that far from being neutral, Rosenfield “does have an agenda” of his own. Whilst the quiet professionalism of Rosenfield was initially welcomed following Cumming’s pantomime departure, it’s now felt he’s taken the role too far the other way:
“Bring a longtime Treasury official into a top political post, surprise surprise they act like a Treasury official. No imagination, no vision. Not even good man-management skills”
The departure of long-time aide Nikki de Costa from Downing Street is also seen as “very worrying”, with sources allied to her claiming “a big part of her reasons for leaving are because she’s fed up of the way [Dan’s] running things”.
Asked whether Rosenfield will survive, one government source said it wouldn’t look disastrous to sack him now, pointing out no one “cares about this stuff” other than SW1 insiders. One source cited recent rumours that Rosenfield had been making inquiries to mates in the City about the possibility of needing a job soon…
Boris has been cleared of breaking the ministerial code over the refurbishment of the Downing Street flat. In a new report released this afternoon, Independent Advisor on Ministerial Interests Lord Geidt concludes:
“Having advised that the interests declared by the Prime Minister present no actual or perceived conflict, I consider them to be consistent with the provisions of the Ministerial Code”.
The report finds that whilst Lord Brownlow did settle the £200,000 renovation bill, Boris only became aware of that fact just before the story was published in the Mail – months after the transaction was made. Geidt describes this “unwise”…
Number 10 immediately issued a response:
“Geidt’s independent report shows the PM acted in accordance with the Ministerial Code at all times. Other than works funded through the annual allowance, the costs of [flat refurbishment] are not being financed by taxpayers and have been settled by the PM personally.”
Read the report in full:
Following yesterday’s news of Boris being hit with a County Court Judgement for £535 of unpaid debt, it’s now emerged the claimant is actually a Covid conspiracy theorist called Yvonne Hobbs, who’s used the Online Civil Money Claims service to accuse the PM of “repeated defamation”. She has also previously made legal claims against Rishi Sunak, Marks and Spencer, and Royal Mail. “I’m taking on the government”, she boasts on social media…
Clearly the claims are invalid, and No. 10 reckons they will be able to strike the defamation claim out given they’re not normally heard in a county court.
Anyone can make an online court claim for as little as £25, so there’s not much stopping someone else pulling the same stunt again. The main question is how events got to this stage in the first place – why were the court letters, posted to No. 10, missed or ignored for so long? Classic civil service…
With the Downing Street flat decor debacle raging on, Guido’s been looking back through the interior design choices of Boris’s predecessors. What’s surprising is that much need spending at all, given the Camerons oversaw extensive renovations, including the installation of a new £25,000 second kitchen in their first year living there. By 2011 alone, Dave had spent his full £30,000 allowance and an additional £34,000 in out-of-pocket costs doing the place up. By Theresa May’s era, the decor was hardly unlivable. Albeit looking like a slightly up-market hotel room…
Ironically, given the current ‘bodies piled high’ row, the David Cameron-era flat can be seen in the Sun video bedecked with a giant wall display above their dining room table, reading “Kill” or “Vaccinate” in regards to the old foot and mouth debate. Guido presumes the poster is no longer on display…
From the tone of coverage and discourse on social media about the Downing Street flat’s controversially-financed redecoration, you would imagine that there was a snobby reaction to the “John Lewis furniture nightmare” on the part of Carrie and Boris bordering on allergic when they moved in. This morning’s coordinated tweets from Labour MPs give a flavour of that view:
Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds consider John Lewis furniture a “nightmare”.
— Nadia Whittome MP (@NadiaWhittomeMP) April 27, 2021
Maybe they should ask the 14 million people living in poverty, or the 280,000 people who are homeless, what they have nightmares about.
I bet John Lewis sofas wouldn't feature.
Many of the customers of John Lewis don’t agree they live in a “John Lewis nightmare” what unctuous snobbery oozing from No10!
— Barry Sheerman MP (@BarrySheerman) April 27, 2021
Most revealing about Johnson & his Downing St refurb - he wanted rid of Theresa May’s “John Lewis nightmare”. Most people consider John Lewis reliable, good value & upmarket. One of Britain’s favourite brands. #TorySleaze
— Ben Bradshaw (@BenPBradshaw) April 25, 2021
The commentariat hasn’t been shy of misattributing the phrase either:
Can't quite get my head around Carrie Symonds reportedly looking down on 'John Lewis furniture'. I think we had our wedding list there. For all but the tiniest section of the population, John Lewis is posh.
— James O'Brien (@mrjamesob) April 27, 2021
One of the most offensive details of the PM/Carrie Symonds reno scandal is that they had the flat redone because it was a “John Lewis nightmare”. That nightmare is aspirational and out of reach for very many people in this country. And nobody is paying for their gaffs
— Hannah Fearn (@hannahfearn) April 27, 2021
Somewhat lost in this saga is that the phrase “John Lewis furniture nightmare of the May years” actually originated months ago from the elegant hand of Anne McElvoy in a Tatler article, not the mouth of Carrie Symonds. The actual evidence is that far from despising the middle-classes’ go-to shop, Carrie is in fact one of their most avid customers. On the very day she moved into Downing Street the Daily Mail had photographs (above) of a large delivery of boxes arriving from John Lewis. That’s a lot of boxes from a store she is supposed to detest…
Downing Street has announced there will be a Cabinet Office internal inquiry into the Dyson texts leak to the BBC. They made clear the inquiry won’t cover the other leaks we’ve had recently. None of the so-called “chatty rat” leaks will be re-examined.
The probe will only look at texts “as related to this issue of Dyson”, not how messages between Boris and Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman over an abortive bid for Newcastle United were also leaked. Nor has there been a public update on the leak inquiry (dating back to last October) hunting down the so-called “chatty rat” who leaked details of the second lockdown to friendly hacks. Arguably the former leak could have had diplomatic ramifications that impacted on national security, the latter leak during a pandemic is an equally serious matter. Why has there been no conclusion to the hunt for the “chatty rat”?
The working assumption in Westminster media circles is that Dominic Cummings was to blame for those leaks and Downing Street does not want to establish that fact officially because of the risk of blowback – who knows what Dom took with him in that box or on his phone? There might even have to be a messy prosecution under the Official Secrets Act. Better instead to let lying rats lie. Given Cummings was the prime source for so many of the Lobby’s most senior reporters you will not be surprised that this unproven, yet widely believed theory, goes largely unreported by them. The more paranoid even wonder if redthroat, Labour’s new Whitehall source of leaks, is providing cover for Dom. Which would be a three dimensional chess move that was well within the government’s OODA loop.
What would be the motive? Here things get a bit sketchy. Mere revenge for being kicked out seems a bit of a low rent motive. As part of a campaign to destabilise Boris before a triumphant return to Downing Street at the side of Prime Minister Gove? Gove surely has enough on his plate at the moment, with half of the Lobby currently trying to find out where he sleeps at night…
