Tag: Parliamentary Results

Parliament‘s interrogation of Boris Johnson about the Partygate incident has begun.

If he misled the government and attended several parties while the country was under lockdown, the former prime minister will be questioned for nearly four hours.

Mr. Johnson will explain his defense, claiming that even though he admits to deceiving MPs, he ‘didn’t mean to.’

His political career is in jeopardy, and in a 52-page document sent in on Monday, he said that what he did at the time was what he thought was proper.

He was greeted with cheers as he arrived in parliament, before taking a seat alongside other MPs in front of the committee.

He was shown footage of his own words, as he spoke to MPs on multiple occasions during the pandemic and said time and time again there was ‘no party’ in Downing Street.

Privileges Committee chairwoman Harriet Harman set out what Boris will be questioned about and said they would be talking about the ‘rules and guidance’ around his breaches, and that he said he complied with both.

She said: ‘In our report of the 3rd of March we set out the main issues which we will be asking Mr Johnson about today.

‘We will be talking about rules and guidance since Mr Johnson told the house No 10 complied with both.

‘When we refer to rules we mean regulations laid down by the house which have the force of law and under which fixed penalty notices were issued.

‘Guidance is guidance issued by the government, for example when Mr Johnson was talking about ‘hands face space’, he was referring to the guidance on social distancing when he said space.

‘On the basis of information that is in the public domain and evidence the committee has received and in the context of what Mr Johnson said to the House of Commons, we will be establishing what rules and guidance relating to Covid were enforced at the relevant time, Mr Johnson’s knowledge of those rules and guidance, Mr Johnson’s attendance at or knowledge of gatherings that were not socially distanced and those for which fixed penalty notices were issued.’

Ms Harman rejected the former PM’s demand that the inquiry only considers his discussion of coronavirus guidance.

The Labour grandee said the MPs on the cross-party committee will leave their ‘party interests at the door of the committee room and conduct our work in the interests of the House’ as she dismissed claims of bias.

She insisted the committee is ‘not relying’ on evidence provided by the Sue Gray report, as allies of Mr Johnson claim the inquiry is a ‘witch hunt’ now that the civil servant is joining Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer’s office.

Ms Harman added: ‘We have not changed the rules of the procedure that is not within our remit, that is laid down by the House, we’re bound to follow them, that is not what we’ve done.’

She said the evidence raises ‘clear questions and this is Mr Johnson’s opportunity to give us his answers’ before asking him to take the oath.

He swore to tell the truth before issuing an apology and adding ‘hand on heart, I did not lie to the House’.

He started with an apology for illegal gatherings in Number 10 and said: ‘That was wrong, I bitterly regret it, I understand public anger.

‘I continue to apologise for what happened on my watch. I take full responsibility’ but he said ‘I hand on heart I did not lie to the House’

This afternoon he will face a live grilling by the cross-party group of MPs in a hearing that could decide his political fate.

On Monday the group slammed his so-called ‘deadly dossier’ and said it contained ‘no new documentary evidence.’

He called the inquiry’s allegation ‘illogical’, arguing that some of those who attended the events ‘wished me ill and would denounce me if I concealed the truth’.

He wrote that it was ‘Far from achieving a ‘cover-up’. He said: ‘I would have known that any deception on my part would lead to instant exposure. This would have been senseless and immediately self-defeating.’

He said it was ‘implausible’ that he would have known the parties photographed and ‘immortalised’ by his official photographer were rule-breaking.

The only evidence that he intentionally misled the Commons is from the ‘discredited Dominic Cummings’, and that Cummings’ assertions are not ‘supported by any documentation’, Mr Johnson said.

In his evidence he accepts he misled the House of Commons when he said lockdown rules had been followed in No 10 but insisted the statements were made ‘in good faith’.

Further today Mr Johnson’s 110-page bundle of evidence was also released, and it showed what his lawyers had been fighting to get put into the document.

In the evidence his top aide, Martin Reynolds, said Boris ignored his advice to change his line in parliament over whether he had broken his own Covid guidance.

In written evidence to the Privileges Committee, Mr Reynolds said: ‘I do recall asking the then prime minister about the line proposed for PMQs on December 7 suggesting that all rules and guidance had been followed.

‘He did not welcome the interruption but told me that he had received reassurances that the comms event was within the rules.

‘I accepted this but questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times, given the nature of the working environment in No 10. He agreed to delete the reference to guidance.’

In the pages of submitted evidence Mr Reynolds expressed further regret at his ‘bring your own booze’ party invite.

He said: ‘With the benefit of hindsight, the language used was totally inappropriate and gave a misleading impression of the nature of the event.

‘It was an event held because staff needed a morale boost after an extremely difficult period when all sorts of tensions had begun to surface and I hoped that being thanked by the PM and talking to each other might strengthen their sense of being part of one team.

‘The event was not a party in any normal sense of the word.’