‘I Don’t Know The Details’ – Sajid Javid Dodges Questions On Geoffrey Cox

Sajid Javid dodged answering questions about an under-fire Tory MP today, saying: “I don’t know the details.”

Sir Geoffrey Cox has been referred to the Commons anti-sleaze watchdog after allegedly using his office in parliament to defend the British Virgin Islands [BVI] in a corruption case brought by the UK.

The Times uncovered a video of him remotely taking part in a BVI inquiry hearing in September in what appears to be his Westminster office. MPs are not allowed to do work for an outside interest while on the estate.

The QC and former attorney-general, has also been paid more than £1 million in the past 12 months to work as a lawyer for clients including the BVI in a legal inquiry started by the Foreign Office.

It comes as the government is embroiled in a number of so-called “sleaze” scandals that are still dominating the headlines after more than a week.

But Javid refused to get into the fresh controversy surrounding Cox, despite his colleague foreign secretary Dominic Raab defending him yesterday morning.

In a fractious interview with Sky News, Javid said: “I don’t want to get into any individual case, especially if I don’t know the details, but I know obviously the big issue that you’re talking about and I do think it is important that any member of parliament – if they do have any external duties – that they are completely open and transparent about that.”

He was told Labour was referring Cox to the standards committee for allegedly breaking the rules and asked by host Kay Burley: “Do you want to defend him this morning?”

“As I said, I’m not going to get into an individual case. I don’t know the individual circumstances of every member of parliament,” Javid said.

The health secretary went on to say Cox was a “fantastic cabinet minister” but on these issues: “I don’t know the details.”

Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner has written to Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone this morning asking her to investigate.

Rayner said: “My understanding of this rule has always been that members were never to use the facilities gifted to them by parliament and their constituents for their private interests. The member has clearly broken this rule based on the media reports we have seen…members must be clear that they cannot use the estate for private financial gain and where there is such a stark conflict with public interest, they must face substantial consequences.”