In response to Sue Gray’s partygate report, which cited a “lack of leadership and judgment” for the lockdown-breaking parties held in No. 10 during the COVID pandemic, the privileges committee launched its investigation.
Boris Johnson admitted he deceived the House of Commons regarding partygate, but insisted his statements were made “in good faith.”
In his testimony, the former prime minister claimed that the privileges committee’s investigation. Into whether he intentionally misled members of parliament “significantly exceeded its mandate.”
“Unprecedented and absurd” was the idea that trusting “trusted advisers” was “reckless.”
However, the committee issued a caustic response, stating that the submission contains “no new evidence” in his defense and that an earlier version had to be resubmitted due to “errors and typos.”
In response to Sue Gray’s partygate report, which blamed a “lack of leadership and judgment” for the lockdown-breaking parties held in No. 10 during the COVID pandemic, the committee launched its investigation.
It provided a damning indictment of the culture that existed at the heart of government at a time. When the rest of the nation was required to adhere to stringent social distance guidelines.
Mr. Johnson admitted that “my statements that the rules and guidelines were strictly adhered to at Number 10 misled the House of Commons.”
“However, “The statements were based on what I honestly knew and believed at the time,” he said.
For many members of parliament, the picture portrayed by Ms. Gray’s report stood in stark contrast to Mr. Johnson’s previous assurances that there was no rule-breaking in Downing Street.
Sir Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, subsequently introduced a motion in the House of Commons calling for an investigation into whether the then-prime minister had misled parliament. The motion was approved by the House of Commons.
Mr. Johnson admitted in his testimony that his statements to the legislature “turned out to be incorrect.” But he insisted he rectified the record “at the earliest opportunity.”
He stated, “I did not intentionally or recklessly mislead the House on December 1, 2021. December 8, 2021, or any other date.”
I never would have imagined doing so.
“There are no new facts in Johnson’s submission”
The 52-page defense dossier was released on Tuesday, a day before he confronts live questioning by the cross-party group of MPs in a hearing that could determine his political future.
The committee responded that Mr. Johnson’s legal argument “contains no new documentary evidence”. And must be resubmitted on Tuesday due to “several errors and typos.”
Mr. Johnson insisted that, aside from the “allegations of discredited Dominic Cummings,” his former aide. “Not a single document indicates that I received any warning or advice that any event violated” the rules.
The former Tory leader refuted the committee’s belief that the evidence strongly suggested that breaches of coronavirus rules would have been “obvious” to him as prime minister, labeling the claim “illogical.”
He argued that some attendees “wished me ill and would denounce me if I hid the truth”
Mr. Johnson insisted it was “unprecedented and absurd” to imply he acted irresponsibly by relying on the assurances of his advisors and criticized the “highly partisan tone and content” of the interim report’s damning findings.
“It is unclear why Met fined me”
The former prime minister denied that No. 10’s “old, cramped London townhouse”‘s lack of social space violated policy.
“I sincerely believed that these events were legal to work gatherings,” he said.
And while he said he accepts the conclusion of the Met Police investigation. He said it “remains unclear” to him – and potentially to Rishi Sunak, the prime minister. Why they were fined for violating lockdown laws.
What is the committee looking into?
If Mr. Johnson fails to persuade the committee that he did not intentionally mislead the House of Commons. He may be found guilty of contempt of parliament.
Uxbridge and South Ruislip may have a high-profile by-election after a delay of more than ten days.
