A parliamentary inquiry has concluded that Boris Johnson knowingly misled parliament multiple times with his statements about parties in Downing Street that breached COVID rules.
The privileges committee of MPs found Mr Johnson’s breaches serious enough to recommend a suspension of 90 days if he were still an MP – far exceeding the period needed to trigger a recall petition and possible by-election.
In the highly anticipated report, published this morning, the committee found that Mr Johnson:
• Misled the house on multiple occasions
• Committed further contempt in his conduct last week by impugning the committee, thereby undermining the democratic process of the House
• Was complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee
The committee also recommended that now Mr Johnson has resigned as an MP, he should not be granted a former member’s pass to parliament.
Johnson ‘deliberately misled the House’ and ‘was complicit in attempted intimidation of committee’ – politics latest
In a scathing 30,000 word assessment, the committee said that in “deliberately misleading the House Mr Johnson committed a serious contempt”.
“The contempt was all the more serious because it was committed by the prime minister, the most senior member of the government.
“There is no precedent for a prime minister having been found to have deliberately misled the House.”
‘A dreadful day for democracy’
The former prime minister immediately hit back by branding the committee’s report a “charade”, adding: “I was wrong to believe in the committee or its good faith.
“The terrible truth is that it is not I who has twisted the truth to suit my purposes. It is Harriet Harman and her committee.
“This is a dreadful day for MPs and for democracy.
“This decision means that no MP is free from vendetta, or expulsion on trumped up charges by a tiny minority who want to see him or her gone from the Commons.
“I do not have the slightest contempt for parliament, or for the important work that should be done by the Privileges committee.
“But for the privileges committee to use its prerogatives in this anti-democratic way, to bring about what is intended to be the final knife-thrust in a protracted political assassination – that is beneath contempt.”
The former prime minister has been under investigation by the Commons privileges committee since last June, after an investigation by police and then senior civil servant Sue Gray confirmed a series of gatherings had taken place in Downing Street during lockdowns.
The cross-party committee, led by Labour MP Harriet Harman, has been assessing whether Mr Johnson misled parliament – either recklessly or deliberately – with his statements claiming all COVID rules and guidance were followed by Number 10.
Johnson had ‘personal knowledge’ of gatherings
In coming to its conclusion, the MPs did not find Mr Johnson’s defence that no one had advised him the gatherings were against the rules as credible.
He also challenged the committee over the fact that the evidence it received “contains not a single document that indicates that I received any warning or advice that any event broke or may have broken the rules or guidance”.
But the committee said it believed “Mr Johnson’s personal knowledge of the gatherings, in particular what he saw while he was present at them, means that he would not have needed to be reliant on advice to satisfactorily assess their nature.
“We also note that Mr Johnson made repeated statements to the House and the public highlighting the responsibility of everyone in the UK to understand and follow the COVID measures in place.”
The former prime minister has repeatedly asserted that he believed one Number 10 leaving do – where he was seen toasting colleagues to mark the departure of communications chief Lee Cain – was “absolutely essential for work purposes”.
But the committee again found against him, saying it did not believe that “severe staff morale pressures during the COVID pandemic … in itself provided a licence for Mr Johnson’s conveniently flexible interpretation of the rules on gatherings, or the guidance on social distancing.”
They added: “A workplace ‘thank you’, leaving drink, birthday celebration or motivational event is obviously neither essential or reasonably necessary.
Read more:
Who are the privileges committee investigating whether Boris Johnson misled parliament over partygate?
Boris Johnson: What the former PM told the privileges committee about partygate
“Mr Johnson is adamant that he believed all of the events which he attended and of which he had direct knowledge were essential.
“That belief, which he continues to assert, has no reasonable basis in the rules or on the facts. A reasonable person looking at the events and the rules would not have the belief that Mr Johnson has professed. That is plain from the fact that around the UK during the period of pandemic restrictions these events did not take place.”
The publication of the report comes after Mr Johnson dramatically quit as an MP on Friday after receiving its draft findings.
In a last-ditch attempt to disparage the Tory-majority panel on the eve of publication, he called for its most senior Conservative member to resign.
He accused Sir Bernard Jenkin of “monstrous hypocrisy” after the Guido Fawkes website reported the MP had gone to a drinks party in Parliament held by Commons Deputy Speaker Dame Eleanor while COVID restrictions were in place in 2020.
But Mr Johnson was accused of attempting to distract from the report’s findings by opposition MPs, while a source close to the committee reportedly dismissed the intervention as “desperate stuff”.
