A Labour MP has claimed there was no precedent for taxpayers paying Boris Johnson’s legal fees for the parliamentary inquiry which concluded the former prime minister deliberately misled MPs.
Karl Turner said there was no evidence to suggest the Government had paid the fees for former ministers involved in parliamentary inquiries on any other occasion.
Mr Sunak has previously told the Commons it was a “long-established process” of both Conservative and Labour governments that former ministers are supported with legal representation “to deal with matters that relate to their time in office”.
But Mr Turner accused Mr Sunak of having “extended” the precedent to cover Mr Johnson’s defence during the Privileges Committee investigation, saying the Prime Minister should apologise and correct the record in the Commons.
The Labour MP for Hull East acknowledged former ministers had their legal fees paid for in public inquiries, but said there was no evidence such a step had been taken before in parliamentary probes.
The legal fees for Mr Johnson’s defence in the MP-led inquiry have reportedly cost the taxpayer £245,000.
Making a point of order in the Commons, Mr Turner said: “On May 24, in Prime Minister’s Questions, I asked the Prime Minister why it was that he was forcing the British public to pay the legal bill for Boris Johnson for the Privileges Committee.”
He added: “In his reply, the Prime Minister said there was a convention that former ministers or ministers would have their legal bill covered in scenarios… requiring lawyers.”
He went on: “What the Prime Minister did was suggest that the precedent was already set. It isn’t.
“And following several questions to the Cabinet Office, it transpires that they can give me no single example where a minister or former minister have had their legal bills covered for a parliamentary inquiry.
“He’s effectively extended the precedent.”
He said the Prime Minister should “apologise and correct the record” in the Commons.
“One would have thought, given the events in recent days, the Prime Minister would be keen to get back there to set the record straight,” he said.
Mr Turner has submitted written parliamentary questions to the Cabinet Office, asking if former ministers have received money for their legal representation in parliamentary – or more specifically Privileges Committee – inquiries, and what the evidential basis is for Mr Sunak’s claim.
Cabinet Office minister Jeremy Quin said in response to a written parliamentary question: “The Privileges Committee inquiry relates to the conduct of the (now former) prime minister making statements at the despatch box on behalf of HM Government.”
He added: “The principle is not limited to public inquiries and has been applied in other contexts – for example, litigation. The same principle can also be applied to parliamentary inquiries, where it relates to one’s conduct as minister of the Crown.”
