Boris Johnson is facing the threat of a new probe into the lavish revamp of his Downing Street flat by the Commons sleaze watchdog he has attempted to undermine.
The Prime Minister was forced last night to deny claims that his botched effort to overhaul the standards process had been a ‘pre-emptive’ strike on Kathryn Stone.
Cabinet minister Kwasi Kwarteng yesterday suggested the parliamentary standards commissioner’s role was untenable in the wake of the row over Owen Paterson.
Miss Stone can now reveal that the PM himself is under investigation.
According to the Daily Mail, the commissioner will decide whether or not to open an investigation into the funding of the refurbishment after a separate probe by the Electoral Commission has been completed.

Boris Johnson (pictured here with Carrie, his wife, during the G7 summit at Carbis Bay, Cornwall, June) is now facing a new sleaze probe into all his affairs, this one in relation to the controversial refurbishment his Downing Street apartment.

Boris Johnson commissioned eco-friendly interior designer Lulu Lytle whose gold wallpaper can cost as much as £840 a roll. Lord Brownlow, Tory donor and founder of the Tory Party, initially paid an invoicing to cover some of the costs. However, BP settled the bill before Lulu Lytle could pay the invoice.
The Commission has now handed its initial findings to Tory party leaders, who have the opportunity to respond.
Lord Brownlow, a Tory donor and financier, paid an invoice for some of the costs. This effectively granted Mr Johnson a loan. The PM then settled the bill. The Mail published several exposes and this was not made public. Eco-friendly interior designer Lulu Lytle was hired to transform the flat with gold wallpaper costing as much as £840 a roll.
Lord Geidt, the ministerial standards adviser, earlier this year found Mr Johnson did not breach the ministerial code but acted ‘unwisely’ in allowing the refurbishment to go ahead without ‘more rigorous regard for how this would be funded’.
The Electoral Commission is conducting a separate investigation to see if donations to the party have been properly declared.
If Miss Stone goes ahead, she would ask Miss Stone to investigate the matter. Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner requested in June that she investigate. Dominic Cummings, Mr Johnson’s former chief aide, yesterday claimed in a tweet that the Government’s bid to change the standards process to spare Mr Paterson from being punished was actually ‘a pre-emptive strike by [the]PM [the]EC (Electoral Commission). [Miss] Stone’.
But No 10 denied the planned overhaul had been designed to protect Mr Johnson’s own interests. Mr Johnson has repeatedly clashed with Parliament’s sleaze watchdogs. In July, he was criticised for failing to explain promptly how a £15,000 holiday in Mustique was paid for.
Miss Stone also found him to have broken the code of conduct for the 2020 New Year break, but he was able to escape with a slap on her wrist because the committee on standards overruled his request.
The committee said it was nevertheless ‘regrettable’ that a full explanation was not given before.
The probe began in February last year after the Mail revealed there were questions over who paid for the PM’s ten-day stay on the luxury Caribbean island. He had claimed the £15,000 cost of his accommodation was a gift from Carphone Warehouse founder David Ross.
Multimillionaire businessman, however, claimed that he did not own the villa or had paid for its use. Following an investigation, Miss Stone found Mr Johnson breached the MPs’ code by having not ‘fulfilled conscientiously’ requirements for registering the stay. After the committee received the commissioner’s report, its chairman Labour MP Chris Bryant wrote to Mr Johnson and Mr Ross demanding more information.
Their replies revealed an ‘ad hoc arrangement’ under which the Mustique Company paid the owners of the villa Mr Johnson stayed in and Mr Ross reimbursed them.
So the committee concluded Mr Ross was the funder of Mr Johnson’s accommodation, meaning the PM’s first declaration was accurate. But it said: ‘This matter could have been concluded many months ago if more strenuous efforts had been made to dispel the uncertainty.’