Challenged the minister on delays in publishing ministerial interests lists, questioned transparency regarding former Ministers' interests, and called for regular reporting. Raised concerns over the Prime Minister's promise of integrity and requested a duty affirmation from the Government to uphold civil service impartiality.

Proposed that Sir Laurie Magnus write annual public letters to the Prime Minister on system effectiveness and needed improvements.

Asked about the former Deputy Prime Minister's resignation, whether the Government knew or approved his statements blaming victims for bullying issues, and if he should apologise. She also questioned the PM's financial interests declaration and requested more regular updates on ministerial interests.

Suggested that the Government should reach out to opposition parties to devise some form of cooperation.

Asked about delays in publishing ministerial declarations and questioned the point of having a code if Ministers do not abide by it.

Asked about swift action to reduce the time frame for complaints about ministerial behaviour.

Critiqued the current system as unsatisfactory due to lack of integrity from Prime Ministers.

Asked about rebooting the ministerial code to focus on values expected of Ministers.

Suggested that the current ministerial code system is outdated and needs reform to unify with parliamentary codes of conduct.

If we are serious about supporting and defending the independence and sagacity of our senior civil servants, their advice on whether something should be in the public domain or not should surely be enough. Otherwise, it is a direct challenge to the authority of those senior civil servants to whom a Minister is making a declaration. Does the Minister agree with that? Does he also agree that the clue is in the title—a blind trust is just that?

In the discussions with the Deputy Prime Minister last week, was he offered a range of sanctions with regard to the breach of the ministerial code before he resigned?

The transparency provided by the list is important, which is why I welcome its publication. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that the Opposition should follow the Government’s lead on transparency, and publish details of all meetings and contacts that they had with senior civil servant Sue Grey before her appointment as Labour party chief of staff?

Does the Minister not agree that we now have a Prime Minister who has to be forced—compelled, if not embarrassed—into showing any sort of transparency?

When Sir Laurie Magnus gave evidence to PACAC on the compliance of Ministers with the ministerial code, he said: “I think you have to rely on their honesty, their compliance with the seven principles of public life and their recognising that if they are to have the privilege of a ministerial position, they have to comply with the expected standards.” What can we do in this place when they do not?

There are so many loopholes in the regulatory system for all the codes of conduct, but in that of the ministerial code in particular. The so-called Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests is anything but independent, and unable to initiate their own investigations or to decide on what sanctions are appropriate. When will the Government adopt my Elected Representatives (Codes of Conduct) Bill, which I introduced at the beginning of the year to close the existing loopholes?

The problem the Minister has is that there is a pattern with the Prime Minister: he has already been fined for not wearing a seatbelt and for breaching covid rules, and he is currently being investigated over allegations about his registering of interests. Now, in an unprecedented move, it has been reported that the investigation has been widened because of allegations that it was discussed in public. Can the Minister explain why this Prime Minister, sadly much like his predecessor but one, seems to be—[Interruption.]

We had the fast track for covid contracts, where people did not have to be a Conservative party member or donor—but it didn’t half help—to get a contract. We have had Ministers having to resign over various misconducts. We have had gaps in their declarations of interest, and now we have this investigation into the Prime Minister. That is a fact: that is happening. Does the Minister not think it is time that we had an independent ethics investigator who could look into these matters? Regardless of who is in government, the public’s view is that these things bring down our politics. Should we not all work together to clean it up and make sure that there is an independent investigator with power to independently investigate?

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Minister for his clarification and the answers that he is trying to deliver. Will he further outline whether clear guidance will be issued on what constitutes a conflict of interest and how far that extends, to ensure that this House does not continue to consider these matters with the current greyness?