Carrie Johnson, the vanishing story and questions about ‘plum jobs’

Downing Street’s influence over the media is under scrutiny following the disappearance of a newspaper article claiming Boris Johnson tried to hire his then-mistress Carrie Symonds as his Foreign Office chief of staff back in 2018.

The story appeared on page five in the first edition of The Times on Saturday, but was pulled from later editions. Johnson was reported to have tried to secure the £100,000 role for Symonds during his term as foreign secretary – when he was still married to second wife Marina Wheeler – before the plan was vetoed by senior officials.

“Here’s the thing,” said The Spectator’s Steerpike, “newspapers might correct political articles but they rarely remove them altogether.” And the row about the pulled article – headlined “Johnson tried to give Carrie top Foreign Office job during affair” – is not the first time that No. 10 has been “accused of trying to kill stories that feature criticism of the PM’s wife”, added the gossip columnist. “Is there a Carrie ‘cover-up’?”

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Denials and affirmations

The Times is yet to comment on the article’s withdrawal. But the reporter behind the story, Simon Walters – described by Steerpike as a “veteran scoop-getter” – told The New European’s Mandrake that he stood by his claims “100%”.

A spokesperson for the prime minister’s now wife said the claims were “totally untrue”.

However, Tory donor and peer Lord Ashcroft painted a similar version of events at Downing Street in his biography of Carrie Johnson. Former No. 10 aide Dominic Cummings has also waded into the row, tweeting on Sunday that the “missing story” was “true”.

No. 10 has admitted being in conversation with The Times around the time that the report was dropped, but denied that Johnson had personally contacted the paper.

Whatever the truth, the pulling of the article “sets a dangerous precedent”, said Simon Kelner at the i news site, and “raises questions we simply cannot ignore”. Crucially, “we need to know what exactly was said that the newspaper felt compelled to act”.

Kelner also asks why, “if the story was deemed to be true and legally sound, why was it on page five?”

Although it was a historic claim, “it’s a fairly incendiary story”, he added.

The Guardian agreed that “at first glance, the story appeared to be the political scoop of the weekend”.

More ‘plum jobs’

The Daily Mirror’s political editor Pippa Crerar today claimed that other attempts were made by Johnson to get his partner a “plum job”.

“The prime minister is said to have raised possible new environmental roles for her in autumn 2020, either on the Cop26 summit or with the Royal Family… as communications director for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Earthshot Prize,” according to Crerar.

His aides “were said to have vetoed both suggestions, warning either position could undermine his wife’s status as a private citizen”.

There was no suggestion that she knew about the alleged job proposals.

No. 10 said Johnson had “never recommended” his now wife “for a government role or one as part of the Earthshot Prize”.

But Crerar added that “it did not deny the claim that he discussed the matter with Downing Street aides”.

Blocking backfires

“Did No. 10 really think blocking the Carrie Johnson story would help?” asked The New Statesman’s The Chatterer.

That the Times article apparently disappeared “not because of legal or editorial issues but because of a phone call from someone in Downing Street” is a “worrying indicator of just how much influence No. 10 wields over the media”, the media and gossip blog continued.

If the plan was to “distract voters from a potential scandal”, the attempt to bury it “has only managed to elevate a page five story to the top of the news agenda”.