Downing Street stands by minister accused of corruption

For months, Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick has been accused of impropriety in his approval of a £1 billion infrastructure development by Richard Desmond – a financial contributor to the Conservative party – despite objections from the local council and an independent planning inspectorate. Documents released yesterday detailing correspondence by Jenrick and his department appear to confirm the worst of these accusations. Read Reaction’s rapid run-down on Jenrick here. 

The main accusation is that Jenrick sped up the planning permission process so that Desmond could avoid paying Tower Hamlets Council’s new Community Infrastructure Levy. The tax on new developments would have cost Desmond at least £40 million, and thus many eyebrows were raised when the housing department approved Desmond’s application a convenient 24 hours before the levy was imposed.

Labour-run Tower Hamlets Council quickly took the matter to the courts, and Jenrick ultimately accepted that the timing “would lead the fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility” of bias. In light of yesterday’s documents, however, that acknowledgement appears to have been seriously understated.

More than a mere “possibility” of bias, one text shows that Desmond had personally expressed to Jenrick his reluctance to pay the £40million tax fine: “Your efficient PA… has arranged a meeting for 19th December at 1030am for meet and site visit… we appreciate the speed as we don’t want to give Marxists loads of doe for nothing!”

Jenrick responded by reminding the property tycoon: “It is important not to give any appearance of being influenced by applications”. Yet, on the same day, a civil servant sent out an email asking for an update on the decision on Jenrick’s behalf: “SoS [Jenrick] has flagged a case in Westferry Docklands… He understands a ministerial decision on this is likely to be coming up soon and also that there may be some sensitivity with timing on final decision.”

Later, as the planning decision approached, an email from a civil servant explicitly described Jenrick’s desire to have the development signed off before the new tax was implemented: “On timing, my understanding is that SoS [Jenrick] is/was insistent that decision issued this week ie tomorrow – as next week the viability of the scheme is impacted by a change in the London CIL regime.” In the context of previous exchanges with Desmond, this directly supports the notion that Jenrick, in his official capacity, was acting in the financial interests of a friend and political donor.

If the ministerial code had been followed faithfully, Jenrick would not have allowed himself to be put in such a position in the first place. The code states that ministers “must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence their work.” Jenrick not only sat next to Desmond at a Conservative party fundraiser in November last year but, according to The Sunday Times, was also shown a “three to four minute” promotional video for the development by the property tycoon, who seized clearly the opportunity to lobby.

Confirming a personal relationship between the two men, Jenrick texted Desmond shortly after the dinner: “Good to spend time with you tonight Richard. See you again soon I hope.” This relationship was not officially declared, despite the ministerial code requiring him to do so. It is also difficult to see how Jenrick met the requirement to “take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias”, given his personal relationship with Desmond, as well as Desmond’s financial relationship with the party.

Two weeks after the planning permission was granted, Desmond made a donation of £12,000 to the Conservative party. Although this is a relatively small sum – especially considering Desmond saved £40million from the timely green light – its timing gives a dangerous air of corruption. The Conservatives remain adamant that “government policy is in no way influenced by party donations – they are entirely separate.” However, Labour is already accusing Jenrick of potentially engaging in a cash-for-favours scandal, and a simple timeline of events makes this a credible line to take.

For Jenrick, this crisis comes atop another planning permission row, concerning his London townhouse. The housing secretary had an extension to his Westminster home approved by Conservative councillors despite officials objecting to three applications by him and his wife, according to The Times. Specifically, Conservative members of the planning committee overturned the planning officer’s recommendations against granting permission. The similarities between this personal case and Jenrick’s official handling of Desmond’s application have not gone unnoticed.

Downing Street is standing by its man for now. In a letter to Labour MPs, Cabinet Secretary Mark Sedwill said: “The Secretary of State has today written to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee stating that he has set out a full and factual account. I understand that he has also published a number of documents in support of this account. In light of this account, the Prime Minister considers that the matter is closed.”