Did Cameron break the ministerial code? PM reported to top civil servant

David Cameron has been reported to Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood for suspicion of breaking the ministerial code in a letter to Ian Hudspeth, the leader of his local council.

The leaked letter made headlines yesterday for exposing the Prime Minister’s apparent disbelief that years of huge spending cuts might lead to compromised public services.

Labour Shadow minister Jon Ashworth has now written to Heywood to highlight a section of the letter in which Cameron offers to set up a meeting between Hudspeth and the Downing St Policy Unit, despite making the communication in his role as Witney MP and not as Prime Minister.

In the letter, Cameron writes: “I would be happy to initiate a further dialogue with advisers in the No10 Policy Unit and yourself – please contact Sheridan Westlake [email] if you wish to take this up.”

Ashworth has contacted Heywood to clarify whether such offers have been made to other council leaders, or whether Hudspeth is being shown “preferential treatment” as leader of the Prime Minister’s county council. He writes:

“Please could you advise of the propriety of this offer in relation to the ministerial code?  The letter appears to have been written by the Prime Minister in his role as an Oxfordshire MP yet it suggests a meeting with his Downing Street Policy Unit. I note that the ministerial code states that ‘Ministers in the House of Commons must keep separate their roles as Minister and constituency Member’ (p.2) and that ‘Ministers are provided with facilities at Government expense to enable them to carry out their official duties. These facilities should not generally be used for Party or constituency activities’ (p.13).

“Is it the case that if the Prime Minister has made this offer of “further dialogue” available to the leader of his local county council, similar offers should be made to all the leaders of other councils? Surely the leader of the Prime Minister’s county council should not be given preferential treatment?”

The letter was dated for the 14th September, and Ashworth is also keen to find out whether any such meeting has yet taken place.