Boris Johnson steps down as MP: Former prime minister’s statement in full

Published

2 years ago

June 10, 2023

admin

Boris Johnson has announced he is standing down as an MP with immediate effect – claiming that he is being “driven out” of politics.

On Friday, the former prime minister released a 1,030 word statement announcing his decision to quit as MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip – a seat he has held since 2015.

Politics live: Boris Johnson quits saying privileges committee wants to ‘drive me out of parliament’

Here’s his statement in full:

I have received a letter from the Privileges Committee making it clear – much to my amazement – that they are determined to use the proceedings against me to drive me out of parliament.

They have still not produced a shred of evidence that I knowingly or recklessly misled the Commons.

They know perfectly well that when I spoke in the Commons I was saying what I believed sincerely to be true and what I had been briefed to say, like any other minister.

They know that I corrected the record as soon as possible; and they know that I and every other senior official and minister – including the current prime minister and then occupant of the same building, Rishi Sunak – believed that we were working lawfully together.

I have been an MP since 2001. I take my responsibilities seriously. I did not lie, and I believe that in their hearts the committee know it.

But they have wilfully chosen to ignore the truth because from the outset their purpose has not been to discover the truth, or genuinely to understand what was in my mind when I spoke in the Commons.

Their purpose from the beginning has been to find me guilty, regardless of the facts. This is the very definition of a kangaroo court.

Most members of the committee – especially the chair – had already expressed deeply prejudicial remarks about my guilt before they had even seen the evidence. They should have recused themselves.

In retrospect it was naive and trusting of me to think that these proceedings could be remotely useful or fair. But I was determined to believe in the system, and in justice, and to vindicate what I knew to be the truth.

It was the same faith in the impartiality of our systems that led me to commission Sue Gray. It is clear that my faith has been misplaced.

Of course, it suits the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, and the SNP to do whatever they can to remove me from parliament.

Sadly, as we saw in July last year, there are currently some Tory MPs who share that view.

I am not alone in thinking that there is a witch hunt underway, to take revenge for Brexit and ultimately to reverse the 2016 referendum result.

My removal is the necessary first step, and I believe there has been a concerted attempt to bring it about.

I am afraid I no longer believe that it is any coincidence that Sue Gray – who investigated gatherings in Number 10 – is now the chief of staff designate of the Labour leader.

Nor do I believe that it is any coincidence that her supposedly impartial chief counsel, Daniel Stilitz KC, turned out to be a strong Labour supporter who repeatedly tweeted personal attacks on me and the government.

When I left office last year the government was only a handful of points behind in the polls. That gap has now massively widened.

Just a few years after winning the biggest majority in almost half a century, that majority is now clearly at risk.

Our party needs urgently to recapture its sense of momentum and its belief in what this country can do.

We need to show how we are making the most of Brexit and we need in the next months to be setting out a pro-growth and pro-investment agenda.

We need to cut business and personal taxes – and not just as pre-election gimmicks – rather than endlessly putting them up.

We must not be afraid to be a properly Conservative government.

Why have we so passively abandoned the prospect of a Free Trade Deal with the US? Why have we junked measures to help people into housing or to scrap EU directives or to promote animal welfare?

We need to deliver on the 2019 manifesto, which was endorsed by 14 million people. We should remember that more than 17 million voted for Brexit.

I am now being forced out of parliament by a tiny handful of people, with no evidence to back up their assertions, and without the approval even of Conservative party members let alone the wider electorate.

I believe that a dangerous and unsettling precedent is being set.

The Conservative Party has the time to recover its mojo and its ambition and to win the next election. I had looked forward to providing enthusiastic support as a backbench MP. Harriet Harman’s committee has set out to make that objective completely untenable.

The committee’s report is riddled with inaccuracies and reeks of prejudice but under their absurd and unjust process I have no formal ability to challenge anything they say.

The Privileges Committee is there to protect the privileges of parliament. That is a very important job. They should not be using their powers – which have only been very recently designed – to mount what is plainly a political hitjob on someone they oppose.

It is in no one’s interest, however, that the process the Committee has launched should continue for a single day further.

So I have today written to my association in Uxbridge and South Ruislip to say that I am stepping down forthwith and triggering an immediate by-election.

I am very sorry to leave my wonderful constituency. It has been a huge honour to serve them, both as mayor and MP.

But I am proud that after what is cumulatively a 15 year stint I have helped to deliver among other things a vast new railway in the Elizabeth Line and full funding for a wonderful new state of the art hospital for Hillingdon, where enabling works have already begun.

I also remain hugely proud of all that we achieved in my time in office as Prime Minister: getting Brexit done, winning the biggest majority for 40 years and delivering the fastest vaccine roll out of any major European country, as well as leading global support for Ukraine.

It is very sad to be leaving parliament – at least for now – but above all I am bewildered and appalled that I can be forced out, anti-democratically, by a committee chaired and managed, by Harriet Harman, with such egregious bias.

UK

Senior King aide was head of royal protection when Prince Andrew ‘asked officer to dig up dirt on accuser’

Published

2 hours ago

October 21, 2025

admin

Senior King aide was head of royal protection when Prince Andrew 'asked officer to dig up dirt on accuser'

A current senior member of the King’s household was the head of royal protection at the time Prince Andrew allegedly asked one of his police officers to dig up dirt on Virginia Guiffre, Sky News has discovered.

Lord Peter Rosslyn, who is now Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to the King and Queen, was head of Royalty and Diplomatic Protection between 2003-2014.

It is not clear if Lord Rosslyn – known at the time as Commander Peter Loughborough – was made aware of Prince Andrew’s request. However, it reportedly happened in 2011 when it’s claimed Andrew wrote in an email that he passed the date of birth and confidential social security number of his accuser, Virginia Guiffre, to one of his close protection team to find out information about her.

At the weekend, the Metropolitan Police said it was “actively looking into the claims made”.

Sky News approached Lord Rosslyn for comment, which was passed to Buckingham Palace.

A palace spokesperson said: “As you may or may not be aware, Lord Rosslyn works for The Royal Household and thus this issue has been referred to me. However, since this matter relates to his time in service with the Metropolitan Police, they would be the appropriate body to approach with media enquiries of this nature.”

The Met Police had nothing further to add.

Police sources have told Sky News the officer (CPO) involved would have been expected to escalate this request from Andrew to his superiors.

While there may have been other members of senior staff between the CPO and Lord Rosslyn, the request should have been considered serious enough to be referred to the top of the Royalty and Diplomatic Service.

Those with knowledge of the royal household tell us Lord Rosslyn is one of the King’s closest and most trusted members of staff.

His role as Lord Steward involves managing all aspects of the King’s personal affairs, and the non-state business of the monarch.

Who is Lord Peter Rosslyn?

As well as being much respected by Queen Elizabeth II, and affectionately known as her “favourite policeman”, in 2014 Lord Rosslyn was appointed as Master of the Household of the then Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at Clarence House.

In February 2003, he was made Lord Steward by the King, thereby becoming the “first dignitary of the King’s court” – a sign that the monarch wanted to keep him around.

While Andrew’s alleged attempts to smear Virginia Guiffre would have been morally wrong, he also would have been asking his police officer to put his career on the line.

Any attempt to use police databases to find information on an innocent individual not connected to a crime would have been a sackable offence, and unlawful.

In his statement on Friday, Prince Andrew again stressed that he vehemently denies the allegations against him.

A Buckingham Palace source told Sky News that the recent claims that have emerged are being viewed by the Royal Family with “very serious and grave concern” and “should be examined in the proper and fullest ways”.

Andrew should give evidence to US authorities – minister

The revelation comes as a government minister said Andrew should give evidence to US authorities – and anger grows after it emerged he had been paying “peppercorn rent” for two decades.

On Friday, Andrew announced he was giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York, after new, damaging reports about his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Passages from the memoir released on Tuesday of the late Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew of sexually assaulting her, provide further details of their alleged encounters.

Prince Andrew has always strenuously denied the allegations.

Business Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday he would “support” Prince Andrew giving evidence to US prosecutors.

He added he would also support any decision by the Met Police to investigate allegations that Prince Andrew used a Met bodyguard to gain information on Giuffre.

It comes as anger continues to grow over Prince Andrew’s housing arrangements.

‘Peppercorn rent’

The royal has only paid “peppercorn rent” for more than two decades at his Windsor mansion, according to a National Audit Office report published in 2005.

“Peppercorn rent” is a legal term used in leases to show that rent technically exists, so the lease is valid, but it’s nominal, often literally £1 a year or just a symbolic amount.

In practice, it means the tenant pays no rent.

It also shows he was required to pay a further £7.5m for refurbishments.

A document from the Crown Estate also shows he signed a 75-year lease on the property in 2003.

It reveals he paid £1m for the lease and that since then he has paid “one peppercorn” of rent “if demanded” per year.

The agreement also contains a clause which states the Crown Estate would have to pay Andrew around £558,000 if he gave up the lease.

Pressure is mounting on him to give up the 30-bedroom mansion.

Senior Tory Robert Jenrick called for Prince Andrew to live privately.

‘He has disgraced himself’

He said: “It’s about time Prince Andrew took himself off to live in private and make his own way in life.

“He has disgraced himself, he has embarrassed the royal family time and again. I don’t see why the taxpayer, frankly, should continue to foot the bill at all. The public are sick of him.”

Mr Kyle, however, said that would be a question for King Charles.

But he did say MPs could bring forward a motion to strip Prince Andrew of his remaining titles, adding it would be up to Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle to choose one of these motions for debate.

UK

Bank tax could hurt households and business lending, UK’s biggest mortgage provider says

Published

2 hours ago

October 21, 2025

admin

Bank tax could hurt households and business lending, UK's biggest mortgage provider says

The chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group has warned that a tax raid on the banks could harm lending to households and businesses.

In an exclusive interview with Sky News at the government’s regional investment summit, Charlie Nunn urged the chancellor to ignore calls for a windfall tax on commercial banks even though the sector is enjoying record profits.

“If we are going to have the ability and the confidence to continue to lend into the real economy, to help households and businesses invest, we need to make sure that the financial services system and Lloyds Banking Group really remains healthy in that context,” he said.

Money latest: Which country pays the most for a pint?

Britain’s four largest banks – HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds Banking Group and NatWest – posted record profits of £45.9bn last year and are on course for another bumper performance this year, thanks to higher interest rates.

Their financial success has raised speculation that the sector could be in the chancellor’s firing line at next month’s budget.

Rachel Reeves could raise the bank surcharge – a levy on bank profits in addition to corporation tax.

The Conservative government cut the levy from 8% to 3% in 2023. Returning it to 8% could raise £2bn for a chancellor who needs to find anywhere up to £50bn to meet her fiscal rules.

Some have suggested a separate windfall tax, which could raise closer to £8bn.

Mr Nunn said such a move risked undermining the health of a sector which underpins the country’s economic prosperity.

“Obviously, taxes are a matter for the government to look at. But it’s definitely one of the factors that impact our ability to support the real economy in the UK,” he said.

A raid on the banks would cause pain to a sector that is already facing substantial costs because of the car finance scandal.

Lloyds, one of the most exposed lenders, has set aside nearly £2bn to cover potential compensation arising from the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) redress scheme.

The FCA established the scheme to draw a line under the long-running mis-selling scandal, in which lenders failed to disclose commission paid to brokers, meaning many customers ended up paying more than they should have for their car finance.

Under the FCA’s scheme, eligible customers – as many as 14.2 million – could receive an average of £700 each.

There is mounting anger within the industry at the way the scheme, which is going out to consultation, has been set up. Mr Nunn said the proposal was too generous to customers and not proportionate to the harms actually caused to customers.

He did not rule out the possibility of a judicial review but, in the first instance, called for a rethink, warning that the current scheme risks scaring away investors, causing an exodus from the market and driving up the cost and availability of credit.

“When you look at the implication of what’s being proposed by the FCA, it’s going to potentially take 20 years of profitability of the car finance industry. And, what does that mean for invest ability in that industry and for other investors and businesses looking to invest in the UK? There’s real concern that this is going to create an invest ability issue,” he said.

“Our concern is will the industry continue to function? Will it support all customers across the whole of the UK that need finance? Will other investors be looking at this and wondering whether the UK is a place they should invest, if retrospectively we can take away 20 years of profits?”

UK

Anger grows over Prince Andrew’s ‘peppercorn rent’ arrangement as accuser’s memoirs released

Published

6 hours ago

October 21, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew should give evidence to US authorities, a government minister has said, as anger grows after it emerged he had been paying “peppercorn rent” for two decades.

On Friday, Prince Andrew announced he was giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York, after new, damaging reports about his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Passages from the memoir released on Tuesday of the late Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew of sexually assaulting her, provide further details of their alleged encounters.

Prince Andrew has always strenuously denied the allegations.

Business Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday he would “support” Prince Andrew giving evidence to US prosecutors.

He added he would also support any decision by the Met Police to investigate allegations that Prince Andrew used a Met bodyguard to gain information on Giuffre.

It comes as anger continues to grow over Prince Andrew’s housing arrangements.

‘Peppercorn rent’

The royal has only paid “peppercorn rent” for more than two decades at his Windsor mansion, according to a National Audit Office report published in 2005.

“Peppercorn rent” is a legal term used in leases to show that rent technically exists, so the lease is valid, but it’s nominal, often literally £1 a year or just a symbolic amount.

In practice, it means the tenant pays no rent.

It also shows he was required to pay a further £7.5m for refurbishments.

A document from the Crown Estate also shows he signed a 75-year lease on the property in 2003.

It reveals he paid £1m for the lease and that since then he has paid “one peppercorn” of rent “if demanded” per year.

The agreement also contains a clause which states the Crown Estate would have to pay Andrew around £558,000 if he gave up the lease.

Pressure is mounting on him to give up the 30-bedroom mansion.

Senior Tory Robert Jenrick called for Prince Andrew to live privately.

‘He has disgraced himself’

He said: “It’s about time Prince Andrew took himself off to live in private and make his own way in life.

“He has disgraced himself, he has embarrassed the royal family time and again. I don’t see why the taxpayer, frankly, should continue to foot the bill at all. The public are sick of him.”

Mr Kyle, however, said that would be a question for King Charles.

But he did say MPs could bring forward a motion to strip Prince Andrew of his remaining titles, adding it would be up to Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle to choose one of these motions for debate.