Boris Johnson did NOT break ministerial code over No10 flat refurb, official probe finds

BORIS Johnson has been cleared over No10 flat refurb – as an official report said he didn’t break the ministerial code.

Lord Christopher Geidt, a former aide to the Queen, today released the long-awaited register of members interests about the PM’s Downing Street decorations.

Boris Johnson was ‘unwise’ to go ahead with the refurb even though he didn’t know how it would be paid – but didn’t break the ministerial code

But he concluded that there was nothing to suggest the PM had acted improperly or broken the code.

He did say the PM was “unwise” to let the refurb go ahead without knowing how it was going to be funded – and who was going to pay the bill, saying it was a “significant failing”.

And it blames officials for failing to let the PM know what was going on and where the money went.

The PM settled the bill for his flat costs in full on March 8 this year after a flurry of reports.

For weeks the PM had been dogged by claims he used Conservative Party funds to foot the costs of a lavish revamp of the No11 digs he shares with Carrie Symonds and one-year-old son Wilfred.U

Under-fire Mr Johnson has dodged questions about whether he initially paid for it.

Tory peer Lord Brownlow was confirmed to have stumped up some of the cash for it, the report said.

Prime ministers are allotted £30,000 a year to refurbish the Downing Street flat – but the bill for the designer Lulu Lytle makeover is said to have spiralled to thousands more.

Ministers are meant to declare all donations within 28 days so they can’t be unduly influenced.

Lord Geidt was appointed No10’s standards adviser last month following the Wallpaper Gate row.

Lord Geidt’s predecessor Sir Alex Allan memorably quit when Mr Johnson refused to fire Priti Patel for bullying civil servants.

Sir Alex ruled that the Home Secretary had broken the ministerial code – typically a resignation offence – but the PM disagreed.

Lord Geidt told MPs that if Mr Johnson also rejected his findings he would also be prepared to resign.

The “cash for curtains” saga has sparked a string of inquiries, including from the Electoral Commission which said “there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred.”