Boris Johnson has quit as an MP with immediate effect – and criticised Rishi Sunak in a blistering resignation letter.
The former prime minister also attacked the panel of MPs who are investigating whether he lied to the Commons over partygate.
The privileges committee has now confirmed it will meet on Monday to conclude its inquiry, with a spokesman vowing to publish its report “promptly”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:51
From journalist to prime minister
In a combative 1,000 word statement, Mr Johnson claimed:
• A “tiny handful of people” are using their investigation to “drive him out” of parliament
• MPs on the privileges committee haven’t “produced a shred of evidence” to suggest he misled the Commons – and their report is “riddled with inaccuracies and reeks of prejudice”
• The committee is a “kangaroo court” that is determined to find him guilty
• A “witch hunt” is under way to “take revenge for Brexit” and reverse the referendum result
• The Conservatives’ gap in the polls has “massively widened” since he left power, and taxes must be cut
Mr Johnsonwas especially critical of Labour MP Harriet Harman, the chair of the privileges committee, and alleged that she was overseeing a panel driven by “egregious bias”.
The Conservatives may face an uphill struggle to hold on to Mr Johnson’s seat in Uxbridge, west London, with polling data from Savanta suggesting that Labour currently has a 14-point lead in the constituency.
It reads like a declaration of war – but in reality, Friday’s resignation statement matters because Boris Johnson is throwing in the towel on his political career.
Yes, there are hints of a third political comeback in his kinetic resignation statement. “Never write him off,” say the pundits in the cheap seats.
Yes, there will be MPs bemoaning his departure if the Tories underwhelm at the next general election and calling for him to return. But he will not be there.
There is no conceivable path to him becoming leader again.
The privileges committee, meanwhile, hit back at Mr Johnson’s comments in a statement – insisting that proper procedures had been followed “at all times” and would continue to be so.
A spokesperson said: “Mr Johnson has departed from the processes of the House and has impugned the integrity of the House by his statement.”
The cross-party privileges committee, which is led by Ms Harman but has a Tory majority, has been assessing whether Mr Johnson misled parliament with his statements claiming all COVIDrules and guidance were followed by Number 10 during lockdown gatherings.
Mr Johnson was facing the prospect of a by-election if MPs recommended a suspension from the Commons of 10 days or more as a punishment for lying.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:05
‘Johnson wasn’t good Uxbridge representative’
Public ‘sick of never-ending Tory soap opera’
Conservative MP Sir Michael Fabricant – who received a knighthood in Mr Johnson’s resignation honours list on Friday – said the former prime minister had been the subject of “disgraceful treatment”.
He tweeted: “Disgraceful treatment of a political leader who has made world history by achieving Brexit and leading the Conservatives to a landslide general election victory.”
Richard Mills, chairman of Uxbridge & South Ruislip Conservative Association, said it had been an “honour and privilege” to work with Mr Johnson since he was elected in 2015 – and called his commitment to the constituency over the last eight years “outstanding”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:54
Thornberry: “I think Boris Johnson brought this on himself”
Former Tory MEP and current chair of the Conservative Democratic Organisation, David Campbell Bannerman, also said he believed Mr Johnson would return to politics in the future.
Speaking to BBC Newsnight, Mr Campbell Bannerman – who served as UKIP deputy leader from 2006 to 2010 – said: “There are big questions about the fairness of this [privileges committee] procedure.
“I think it is a very bad day for democracy, and Boris is right to call it undemocratic.
“And I do hope that he does come back – I believe he will.”
When challenged on the fact that four out of seven of the MPs on the privileges committee are fellow Conservatives, he said: “I’ve got respect for them as individuals – I know them well – but I’m afraid the way this was conducted was outrageous.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:57
Ex-Tory MP: ‘Good’ if Johnson disappeared
‘He blames everybody but himself’
However, many MPs have welcomed Mr Johnson’s departure.
Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner said: “As Boris Johnson exits in disgrace, the British public are sick to the back teeth of this never-ending Tory soap opera played out at their expense.
“After 13 years of Conservative chaos, enough is enough. It’s time for a fresh start for Britain with a Labour government.”
Green MP Caroline Lucas tweeted: “Everyone knew he was not fit to hold public office before he was even an MP. Yet Tories made him their leader and look what happened. Evading scrutiny to the last and choosing to quit just hours after gifting gongs and peerages in atrocious act of patronage and sleaze.”
Meanwhile, former Number 10 communications chief Alastair Campbell said: “His statement is utterly Trumpian.
“It blames everybody but himself – it rewrites history.”
Former Tory MP Anna Soubry also told Sky News that she believed Mr Johnson had resigned because he feared he would lose a vote on any punishment recommended by the privileges committee in the Commons.
“It’s really important to remind everybody that this privileges committee has a Conservative majority,” she said.
“The idea that this is some sort of stitch-up is for the birds.”
Prince Andrew insisted his accuser, Virginia Giuffre, sign a one-year gag order – to prevent details of her allegations tarnishing the late Queen’s platinum jubilee, her memoirs have claimed.
Andrew relinquished his Duke of York title and remaining honours on Friday evening.
But, according to The Telegraph, Ms Giuffre’s book, which is due out on Tuesday, is focusing further attention on the sexual assault allegations and the prince’s friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, which led to the royal’s downfall.
She tells how Andrew’s “disastrous” Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis was like an “injection of jet fuel” for her legal team, and it raised the possibility of “subpoenaing” his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, and daughters Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and drawing them into the legal case.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Prince Andrew’s ’embarrassed’ Royals ‘for years’
The Telegraph also reports Ms Giuffre’s claims that she got “more out of” Andrew than a reported £12m payout and $2m (around £1.4m) donation to her charity because she had “an acknowledgement that I and many other women had been victimised and a tacit pledge to never deny it again”.
Ms Giuffre alleged she was forced to have sex with the prince when she was 17, after being trafficked by Epstein. Andrew continues to vehemently deny her allegations.
Queen Elizabeth II was celebrating her platinum jubilee in 2022 – the first British monarch to reach the milestone – as the civil case against her son was gathering pace.
It was settled nine days after she reached the 70th anniversary of her accession.
According to the Telegraph, Ms Giuffre, who died in April, reveals in her book: “I agreed to a one-year gag order, which seemed important to the prince because it ensured that his mother’s platinum jubilee would not be tarnished any more than it already had been.”
Image: Parades, processions, concerts and street parties were held across the UK in celebration of the Platinum Jubilee. Pic: PA
In January 2022, a US judge ruled the civil case against Andrew could go ahead, and the Queen went on to strip him of his honorary military roles, with the prince also giving up his HRH style.
‘Devastating’ interview
His 2019 Newsnight interview, which he hoped would clear his name, backfired when he said he “did not regret” his friendship with convicted paedophile Epstein, who trafficked Ms Giuffre.
Image: Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre (then Roberts) in 2001 – a picture the prince claimed had been doctored. Pic: Shutterstock
Andrew also said he had “no recollection” of ever meeting Ms Giuffre and added he could not have had sex with her in March 2001 because he was at Pizza Express with his daughter Beatrice on the day in question.
Ms Giuffre, whose book is called Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, wrote, according to The Telegraph: “As devastating as this interview was for Prince Andrew, for my legal team it was like an injection of jet fuel.
“Its contents would not only help us build an ironclad case against the prince but also open the door to potentially subpoenaing his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, and their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.”
‘Amazed he was stupid enough’
She also told how Andrew had “stonewalled” her legal team for months before settlement discussions began moving very quickly when his deposition was scheduled for March 2022.
Ms Giuffre also wrote she was “amazed” that a member of the royal family would be “stupid enough” to appear in public with the convicted paedophile, after a photo of the pair walking in New York emerged.
Andrew, who remains a prince and continues to live in the Crown Estate property Royal Lodge, said on Friday the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the royal family”.
He insisted he was putting his “family and country first” and would stop using “my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me”.
It’s not the first seismic statement I’ve had to deal with from the Royal Family late into the evening.
But what I have learnt from past experience is that when they do come in this way, it’s because the decision has been made to act now and act fast.
Which inevitably has us all wondering, why now?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:35
Prince Andrew: ‘Too much of a distraction’
The latest stories about Prince Andrew and his email to Jeffrey Epstein were again a sign of just how close he’d been to the convicted paedophile, and an extract released from the late Virginia Giuffre’s book was heartbreaking and excruciatingly seedy.
And yes, the full book is released on Tuesday.
But in some ways, we have heard a lot of these lurid details before, albeit allegations that Prince Andrew denies.
Which is why it feels like this time, the family had just had enough.
It’s framed as a personal statement from Andrew, but the involvement of his relatives could not be any clearer: “In discussion with the King, and my immediate and wider family,” he writes, followed up by, “with His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further”.
It has always been hard to get a full picture of how much the King has engaged in the problems with his brother.
Image: Prince Andrew speaks with King Charles as they leave Westminster Cathedral Pic: Reuters
Speak to those who know the family well and they’ll tell you our current monarch “doesn’t like confrontation”, just like Queen Elizabeth II.
And while there has always remained “a warm familial feeling between the two brothers” which we’ve seen through Andrew’s appearance at family events, it is “tempered by the King’s responsibilities as head of state to be entirely separate from the perceived, real or alleged activities of the Duke of York”.
In the end, as head of the institution, and not as his brother, the King would have had to lead the discussions about the Andrew problem, but I suspect with heavy involvement from his eldest son and wife.
William, only in recent weeks, has told us there will be change when he becomes monarch, his advisors stressing he isn’t afraid to question why the Royal Family continues to do things in a certain way.
His very visible unease at standing next to Prince Andrew at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral showed us how uncomfortable he felt about his uncle being there at such a public moment.
His involvement in those discussions behind the scenes and making sure the institution was seen to be taking action against Andrew is likely to have been considerable.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:37
A timeline of allegations against Andrew
I know that Queen Camilla is also a quiet but hugely powerful influence behind palace walls.
She is her husband’s listening ear, sounding board, but also not afraid to tell him when she believes there needs to be change.
Her own work to break taboos around sexual violence and encourage survivors to speak out must have made it even more difficult for her to read the stories about Andrew’s links to Epstein, and the sexual allegations against her brother-in-law, even though he has always vehemently denied them.
And then there are those closest to the Prince.
You have to have sympathy with his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Did they tell their father that he needed to do something for their sake to try and shut down the noise?
His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, has also been burned in recent weeks by her association with Epstein – a spectre who, despite his death, has continued to haunt the royal family.
So what of Prince Andrew? How will this impact him?
Any sense he might have a chance at returning to some kind of public life has truly evaporated. We wait to see if, with time, he is again allowed to appear at least for family occasions.
I’ve always been told “he is robust and self-contained and always has been”.
Interpret that how you will – arrogance that he could ride it out, or a very strongly-held conviction that he has never done anything wrong?
Either way, he clearly believes he has been unfairly punished by the court of public opinion.
One thing a source did tell me is that there is a sense he’s never really needed the affirmation of his family.
He may not need their emotional support, but in the end, we have again seen how no member of the family is bigger than the institution.
Protecting the reputation of “the firm” has to come first.
Prince Andrew may feel that he has done the right thing, even done his family a favour, by personally relinquishing the use of his titles and honours, but this, in the end, was not just his choice.
No longer to be known as HRH or the Duke of York, he is now Prince Andrew only – ultimately forced to fall on his sword by his own family.
Prince Andrew has announced he is giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York.
The decision is understood to have been made in close consultation with King Charles and other members of the Royal Family.
Prince Andrew said continued accusations against him were distracting from the King’s work.
He had been accused by Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, of sexual assault. He denies this.
Which titles is he giving up?
Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title. Sky News understands this will be immediate.
He will also give up his knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and his Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
He will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.
Prince Andrew will also remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.
Image: Virginia Giuffre had accused Prince Andrew of sexually assaulting her before her death. Pic: AP
Why is this happening now?
Ms Giuffre, who was one of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, alleged Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, and sued him in 2021.
In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, due to be published on Tuesday, she alleged he was “entitled” and “believed having sex with me was his birthright”.
Prince Andrew has always denied the allegations.
He has also always claimed that a well-known image of them together was doctored. Before her death, which her family said was by suicide, the case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.
Ms Giuffre’s posthumous memoir goes on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”.
The email was reportedly sent three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.
Image: Flight logs released by a US committee from Epstein’s estate name Prince Andrew. Pic: House Committee on Oversight and Government
On Friday evening, the US House Oversight Committee also released documents from Epstein’s estate showing “Prince Andrew” listed as a passenger on the financier’s private jet – the so-called Lolita Express – from Luton to Edinburgh in 2006, alongside Ghislaine Maxwell.
He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.
The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.
“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said royal correspondent Laura Bundock.
It is understood that the changes will take effect immediately.
The Giuffre family has called for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.
Image: The move will not impact the Princesses, including Princess Beatrice, here.
Will this affect his ex-wife and daughters?
Sky News understands that Andrew will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge. His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also remain living at the Royal Lodge.
But for the second year running, he will not attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, it is understood.
Andrew’s ex-wife will also no longer use her Duchess of York title.
She was dropped by numerous charities last month after it emerged that she wrote to convicted sex offender Epstein, calling him a “supreme friend”, despite publicly disowning him in the media.
The decision over Andrew’s titles will not impact on the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.
She said: “This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.
“Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain. But in what is the prince’s first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying, ‘I vigorously deny the accusations against me’.”
Image: Prince Andrew made the decision to give up his titles in close consultation with King Charles, it is understood. Pic: Reuters
What did Prince Andrew say in his statement?
In his statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.
“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.
“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.
“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.