Zac Goldsmith: Tory minister named in Boris Johnson partygate interference report quits over after refusing to apologise
A Tory minister named in a Privileges Committee report for interfering in Boris Johnson’s partygate probe has resigned from government after refusing to apologise for his actions, according to the prime minister.
Lord Goldsmith, a former MP, quit his environmental role, claiming Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was “simply uninterested” in the issue.
‘Hugely important day for NHS’, minister says – politics latest
But the day before, the Tory peer – a close ally of Mr Johnson, who appointed him to the Lords – was chastised by the Privileges Committee for tweeting about its finding that the former prime minister had lied to parliament about lockdown breaking parties in Downing Street.
In a letter released by Downing Street, it was revealed that Mr Sunak asked him to apologise to the committee, but he refused.
Mr Sunak wrote to the peer: “You were asked to apologise for your comments about the Privileges Committee as we felt they were incompatible with your position as a minister of the crown. You have decided to take a different course.”
The prime minister later said that he was “proud of the record of this government and indeed of Zac in government making sure that we tackle climate change and protect our natural environment”.
In a post on social media, Lord Goldsmith characterised their inquiry as a “kangaroo court” and “witch hunt” – but Mr Sunak’s spokesman insisted the PM still had confidence in the minister.
Just 24 hours after the comments were highlighted, Lord Goldsmith resigned his post with a stinging resignation letter, taking aim at the current incumbent at Number 10.
The Tory peer said it had been an “exhilarating experience” in the job, praising the progress the UK had made in leading on climate change internationally – particularly when Mr Johnson was in office.
But Lord Goldsmith said he had been “horrified” by the government’s “abandonment” of policies around animal welfare, and that its efforts on environmental issues at home had “simply ground to a standstill”.
“More worrying, the UK has visibly stepped off the world stage and withdrawn our leadership on climate and nature,” he wrote in his resignation letter.
“Too often we are simply absent from key international fora. Only last week you [Mr Sunak] seemingly chose to attend the party of a media baron rather than attend a critically important environment summit in Paris that ordinarily the UK would have co-led.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What’s in the Privileges Committee special report?
Read more:
Who was named as criticising the Boris Johnson partygate report?
The ghost of Boris Johnson is still haunting Rishi Sunak | Beth Rigby
Lord Goldsmith said the government had “effectively abandoned” its “solemn” commitment to spend £11.6bn of its aid budget on climate and environment causes – calling it “the single most important signal” to countries suffering and in persuading other G7 countries to act – and had “not come clean on the broken promise” as the final year of spending will be after the next general election.
‘Government apathy on climate’
“Prime minister, having been able to get so much done previously, I have struggled even to hold the line in recent months,” he wrote.
“The problem is not that the government is hostile to the environment, it is that you, our prime minister, are simply uninterested. That signal, or lack of it, has trickled down through Whitehall and caused a kind of paralysis.
“I will never understand how, with all the knowledge we now have about our fundamental reliance on the natural world and the speed with which we are destroying it, anyone can be uninterested.
“But even if this existential challenge leaves you personally unmoved, there is a world of people who do care very much. And you will need their votes.”
The peer said it had been “a privilege” to hold his post, “but this government’s apathy in the face of the greatest challenge we have faced makes continuing in my current role untenable”, so he was resigning “with great reluctance… in order to focus my energy where it can be more useful”.
‘UK continues to play an important role’
In its response, the prime minister said: “We can be proud of the UK’s record as a world-leader on net zero. We are going far beyond other countries and delivering tangible progress whilst bringing down energy bills. This government is also committed to leaving the environment in a better state than we found it, as set out in our environmental improvement plan.
“The UK continues to play an important role globally in tackling climate change and preserving the environment. I attended COP27 in Egypt in November last year and reconfirmed our £11.6 billion climate finance pledge.”
He added: “Even in the last few weeks we have taken this international leadership into the recent G7 Leaders’ Summit in Hiroshima and the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris last week, where the minister of state for development represented the UK.”
Former culture secretary Nadine Dorries – who was also named in Thursday’s report for her “vociferous attacks” on the Privileges Committee – responded to the resignation on Twitter, saying Lord Goldsmith’s “record of achievement”, “depth of knowledge” and “passion” were “second to none”.
She added: “We’ve just lost the most able minister for the environment any government would be lucky and proud to have. This loss is beyond party politics. It’s huge.”
The Liberal Democrats said Mr Sunak “should have had the guts” to sack Lord Goldsmith after the report condemned his actions, saying the PM was “clearly too weak to control his own party”.
One of its MPs, Sarah Olney – who unseated Lord Goldsmith at the last election – added: “This Conservative chaos is never ending. Every day brings more resignations and scandal in this depressing Westminster soap opera.
“Zac Goldsmith’s resignation has at least confirmed what we have known all along – that Rishi Sunak’s government doesn’t give a damn about the environment and animal rights.
“They have scrapped plans to stop puppy smuggling, watered down climate change action and let water companies pump sewage in our rivers. What a sorry state of affairs this is.”
Just a cursory glance at the headlines, and it’s clear the disgrace and downfall of Prince Andrew is not over.
So what next for the man and the monarchy?
The King might have hoped his involvement showed direct action had been taken.
He certainly does not want any distraction from his upcoming state visit to the Vatican.
But that might be wishful thinking.
Now the Met Police has been dragged in too. Forced to look into reports in the Mail on Sunday that Andrew asked his protection officer to smear his accuser, Virginia Giuffre.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Police ‘looking into’ Andrew claims
The prince allegedly wanted his officer “to dig up dirt” and told an aide at the palace what he had done.
Let’s be clear: back then, Andrew’s security was funded by the taxpayer.
So are we reaching the endgame, and what does that look like?
Andrew might have given up the use of his title, Duke of York, and other honours too.
Read more:
Call for Prince Andrew to ‘live in exile’
How Prince Andrew allegations unfolded
Everything we know about titles decision
But what about his style ‘prince’? Some want that ditched too.
It’s a complicated but not impossible process. Andrew could, of course, just stop using it voluntarily.
Some want him to give up his home, too. For a non-working royal, the stately Royal Lodge, with its plum position on the Windsor Estate, is an uncomfortable optic.
Andrew’s wider family is worried. The Sunday Times has reported that the Prince of Wales wants him cut off completely.
With the reputation of the monarchy at risk, William does not want to appear weak. He’s putting loyalty to “the firm” firmly above his familial relationships.
Prince Andrew has always strongly denied the allegations, and restated on Friday: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me”. Sky News has approached him for comment on the fresh allegations set out in the Mail on Sunday.
But with Virginia Giuffre’s tragic death and posthumous memoir due out on Tuesday, Buckingham Palace will be braced for more scandal.
When Andrew gave up his titles, there was certainly a sense of relief.
There is now a sense of dread over what else could emerge.
Sky News’ royal commentator has explained why Prince Andrew has not given up being called a prince – while another expert has said “the decent thing” for him to do would be “go into exile” overseas.
Andrew announced on Friday that he would stop using his Duke of York title and relinquish all other honours, including his role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
However, he will continue to be known as a prince.
Royal commentator Alastair Bruce said that while Andrew’s other honours and titles were conferred to him later in life, he became a prince when he was born to Elizabeth II while she was queen.
He told presenter Kamali Melbourne: “I think […] that style was quite special to the late Queen,” he said. “And perhaps the King, for the moment, thinks that can be left alone.
“It’s a matter really for the King, for the royal household, perhaps with the guidance and advice of government, which I’m sure they are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Since Andrew’s announcement, there has been speculation over whether any further measures will be taken – and one author has now called for him to “go into exile”.
Andrew Lownie, author of The Rise And Fall Of The House Of York, said: “The only way the story will go away is if he leaves Royal Lodge, goes into exile abroad with his ex-wife, and is basically stripped of all his honours, including Prince Andrew.”
Royal Lodge is the Windsor mansion Andrew lives in with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, who has also lost her Duchess of York title.
Andrew and his former wife continue to live on the Windsor estate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Lownie continued: “He makes out he’s an honourable man and he’s putting country and family first. Well, if he is, then the optics look terrible for the monarchy. A non-working royal in a 30-room Crown Estate property with a peppercorn rent.
“He should do the decent thing and go. And frankly, he should go into exile.”
Mr Lownie added if the Royal Family “genuinely want to cut links, they have to put pressure on him to voluntarily get out”.
Read more from Sky News:
How Prince Andrew allegations unfolded
William and Camilla’s influential roles
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Andrew’s decision to stop using his titles was announced amid renewed scrutiny of his relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh stories linked to the late Virginia Giuffre.
Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein, alleged she was sexually assaulted by Andrew on three occasions – which he has always vigorously denied.
The former duke paid to settle a civil sexual assault case with Ms Giuffre in 2022, despite insisting he had never met her.
Bereaved families whose loved ones took their own lives after buying the same poison online have written to the prime minister demanding urgent action.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
The group claims there have been “multiple missed opportunities” to shut down online forums that promote suicide and dangerous substances.
They warn that over 100 people have died after purchasing a particular poison in the last 10 years.
Among those who have written to Downing Street is Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah was 22 when she took her own life after buying the poison from a website.
Hannah was autistic and had ADHD. She was treated in six different mental health hospitals over a four-year period.
Mr Aitken recently spoke to Sky News around the second anniversary of Hannah’s death.
He said: “Autistic people seem to be most vulnerable to this kind of sort of poison and, you know, wanting to take their lives.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Pete Aitken speaking to Sky News
Sky News is not naming the poison, but Hannah was able to buy a kilogram of it online. Just one gram is potentially fatal.
“There’s this disparity between the concentration required for its legitimate use and that required for ending your life. And it seems quite clear you could make a distinction,” Mr Aitken said.
Analysis from the Molly Rose Foundation and the group Families and Survivors to Prevent Online Suicide Harms says at least 133 people have died because of the poison. It also says coroners have written warnings about the substance on 65 separate occasions.
The report accuses the Home Office of failing to strengthen the regulation of the poison and says not enough is being done to close dangerous suicide forums online.
Lawyers representing the group want a public inquiry into the deaths.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, the families said: “We write as families whose loved ones were let down by a state that was too slow to respond to the threat.
“This series of failings requires a statutory response, not just to understand why our loved ones died but also to prevent more lives being lost in a similar way.”
Read more from Sky News:
Blood test for more than 50 cancers ‘could transform outcomes’
Warning of six million new cancer cases – with these areas worst hit
Hospital accused of ‘covering up’ concerns about suspended surgeon
The group’s lawyer, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said: “The government is rightly committed to preventing deaths through suicide, yet despite repeated warnings of the risks posed by an easily accessible substance, fatal in small quantities and essentially advertised on online forums, no meaningful steps have been taken.”
Hannah’s dad is one of the family members to have signed the letter
A government spokesperson said: “Suicide devastates families and we are unequivocal about the responsibilities online services have to keep people safe on their platforms.
“Under the Online Safety Act, services must take action to prevent users from accessing illegal suicide and self-harm content and ensure children are protected from harmful content that promotes it.
“If they fail to do so, they can expect to face robust enforcement, including substantial fines.”
They added that the position is “closely monitored and reportable under the Poisons Act, meaning retailers must alert authorities if they suspect it is being bought to cause harm”.
“We will continue to keep dangerous substances under review to ensure the right safeguards are in place,” they said.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024