Boris Johnson: What we know about Downing Street flat decoration row

Prime minister faces pressure to explain how he paid for renovations in 11 Downing Street home

Boris Johnson is at the centre of a row over the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat, and is facing pressure to reveal how he paid for the lavish renovations.

The row was ramped up after the prime minister’s former aide Dominic Cummings alleged that Mr Johnson wanted donors to secretly fund the work, and described the plan as “unethical, foolish, possibly illegal”.

Labour has stepped up demands for Mr Johnson to explain where they money for the refurbishment came from, but Tory ministers have defended the prime minister by saying he paid for it out of his own pocket.

As the story develops, here is everything we know about the row over Mr Johnson’s flat refurbishment:

What did the flat refurbishment entail?

Boris Johnson and his fiancée Carrie Symonds carried out renovations on the flat above 11 Downing Street, where they live, reportedly to the tune of as much as £200,000.

This is despite the fact that the prime minister only received an annual public grant of £30,000 to spend on the home.

According to Tatler, the couple enlisted interior designer Lulu Lytle for the latest revamp of the property and the plans included transforming it into a “high society haven”.

What did Dominic Cummings said?

Mr Johnson’s former chief adviser published an explosive blog post last Friday alleging that the prime minister had plans to have donors “secretly pay” for the renovation work.

Mr Cummings said this was “unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations if conducted in the way we intended”.

What has Boris Johnson said?

Speaking to reporters during a visit to Wrexham on Monday, Mr Johnson said that “any declaration” that has to be made about the refurbishment “will of course be made in due course”.

He stressed that the issue was not “what people are talking about” and appeared keen to emphasise that the public “want us to concentrate” on continuing the coronavirus vaccine rollout and lifting lockdown restrictions across the UK.

What have other government ministers said?

Ministers have defended the prime minister over the issue and said all rules were complied with.

The defence secretary Ben Wallace told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that Mr Johnson “paid personally for the flat” and had “complied at all stages with the rules”.

The cabinet secretary Simon Case told MPs that Mr Johnson asked him to carry out a review into the matter and to “share the details of those conclusions with the committee”.

Mr Case said he expects the review to take “only a matter of weeks” and that Mr Johnson would be making the “relevant declarations” in regard to spending on his Downing Street flat.

Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, dismissed the claims by Mr Cummings as “tittle tattle”, but repeatedly refused to say whether Mr Johnson received money from a Tory donor or from the party to pay for the flat.

Why is the issue so controversial?

It is unclear how Mr Johnson paid for the flat refurbishment beyond the £30,000 allowance, or if any money originally came from another source, which he then paid back.

Political parties must report any donations or loans above £7,500, and MPs must declare any donations which could influence their actions within 28 days.

The Electoral Commission, which first raised the issue with the Conservative party more than a month ago, confirmed it was looking into whether any of the sums relating to the work on the flat should have been declared.

Labour has called for the Electoral Commission to launch a full inquiry into the funding for the refurbishment, with leader Sir Keir Starmer saying that “it’s very important we have answers”.

“It’s all very well the prime minister saying, now, ‘well I paid for it’,” said Sir Keir. “The critical question was what was the original arrangement.

“And why is it so complicated? If there’s a straightforward answer, then give it. If there isn’t, then there are very serious questions to be asked.”