PMQs – LIVE – ‘Can’t trust Labour’ & ‘SNP a mess’
PMQs – Does the PM accept the Casey review in full?
PMQs – PM to be grilled about potential backbench rebellion & Boris inquiry
PMQs Live – Budget, BBC and immigration policy as Britain strikes today!
PMQs – PM faces Starmer ahead of Spring Budget
PMQs – Sunak grilled on controversial bill
PMQs – ‘I rebut and refute any bullying claims made’ says Dominic Raab
PMQs Live – Dominic Raab stands in for PM as inflation soars
Partygate committee live
Workplace gathering was necessary, Johnson insists
Ione Wells – BBC Political correspondent
Boris Johnson is being pretty defiant. He’s arguing that a leaving do he was photographed at – which shows a lack of social distancing – “had to happen” and was “necessary” because two senior members of staff had left in acrimonious circumstances and he needed to give reassurance, and it was “essential” for work purposes.
He seems to be hammering this point about “necessity” as one of his key defences – the question will be whether that washes with the committee, who will be aware other key workers who still had to go to physical workplaces did not consider in-person leaving dos “necessary”.
Remember though, the committee is not reopening the inquiry into whether these events were in the rules or not. They’re trying to work out if he should have known they were not — and told Parliament as much.
First gathering – back and forth over guidance
There’s some back and forth between BoJo and Jenkin over the issue of guidance.
An image of Boris in the Commons at one of these gatherings where rules seemingly were broken is shown on a large screen.
Jenkin then reads out the exact guidance from the Covid rules at the time, particularly the need for risk mitigations when distancing wasn’t possible, such as screens or barriers.
He asks Johnson to point out where in the picture were there screens or barriers.
Johnson is adamant this was an impromptu gathering to thank staff for their contribution during Covid.
“I accept that perfect social distancing, Sir Bernard, is not being observed” – but goes on to say that was “not incompatible with the guidance”.
Jenkin read BoJo’s public statements about following rules
Tory Bernard Jenkin has kicked off questions, noting statements from the former PM which make clear his understanding of how important it is to follow the rules.
Jenkin says “so there can be no doubt that you knew what the guidance and rules meant?”, to which Johnson replies “yes”.
Showing Johnson a picture of him at an event where he is a small room, holding a drink and appearing to offer a cheers to the room.
Asked if he accepts if people were not making an effort to socially distance from each other in the picture, Johnson says he doesn’t accept this.
“At all stages the guidance was meant to be implemented where possible, that is absolutely clear from the guidance”, he adds.
Johnson says the “confines of No 10” – given how small the building and rooms within it are – made social distancing impossible much of the time.
On why a leaving party was necessary, Johnson says it was important to be there and give reassurances to staff after the acrimonious departure of other people.
“I believe that the guidance is being complied with,” he says, pressed by Jenkin who suggests he wasn’t answering the question.
The committee is now asking its questions.
The first comes from veteran Conservative Bernard Jenkin – one of four Tories on the committee.
Sorry for ‘inadvertently misleading’ House
He apologises for “inadvertently misleading this House” but to say he did it recklessly “is completely untrue”.
He also says the officials at Number 10 “should be immensely proud of their efforts to protect this country from a loathsome disease”.
“I am proud to have known and worked with those officials during one of the most difficult times we can remember,” he says.
“I am proud to have given them leadership and that is what I believe.”
The former PM says COVID “almost killed him” and he took the measures to stop the virus spreading “seriously”.
He also says “at all times” he was “entirely transparent” with the House.
“I made it clear that I did not intend to comment on any of the factual matters until the investigation had been concluded,” he continues.
“I kept the House regularly updated and as soon as the investigations were complete, I provided a full correction of my honest but inadvertently misleading statements. I apologise.”
He also says he trusts that the committee will be fair to officials who worked with him at the time.
“Fair to me, fair to the evidence about what we and I knew and believed and conclude I did not wittingly mislead the House of Commons or recklessly mislead House of Commons and that no contempt has been committed,” he adds.
Police agreed I didn’t break any rules
Boris tells the committee that even the police agreed that his attendance at the “farewell gatherings” at Downing Street did not go against the rules.
“I obviously did not know at the time that any of these events later escalated beyond what was lawful after I left.”
“There is, of course, one event for which I and the prime minister [Rishi Sunk] received fixed penalty notices, but it never occurred to me or I think the current prime minister at the time that the event was not in compliance with the rules and the guidance.”
Dominic Cummings testimony cannot be trusted
In his opening statement, Boris Johnson says “the testimony of Dominic Cummings cannot be trusted.”
Cummings was Chief Adviser to then PM Boris Johnson from 24 July 2019 until Cummings resigned on 13 November 2020.
BoJo attempting to ‘shift the blame’ says Beth Rigby
Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby says Boris Johnson’s defence appears to be attempting to ‘shift the blame’. The impression of his defence so far is that he’s trying to blame others for partygate but the person at the top has to carry the can, says Beth Rigby
Johnson tells committee ‘you haven’t got any such evidence’ – as he hits out at Harman
Continuing his statement after the Brexit deal vote, Mr Johnson says that the overwhelming evidence that the committee has assembled is that senior officials, advisers and civil servants among others “believe that the rules and the guidance were being complied with”.
“And what is so telling is the number of officials who say the same thing and the total silence of the written or electronic record about concerns that anyone wanted to raise with me.
“It would be one thing if the committee had come here today and said, look, here are the emails or here are the WhatsApps that show that you were warned about rule-breaking before you made your statements to the House.
“You haven’t got any such evidence because that never happened.”
Mr Johnson says if it is being suggested that rule-breaking was obvious to him, “then let’s be clear – you are saying you’re not only accusing me of lying, you’re accusing those civil servants, advisers, MPs, of lying about what they believed at the to be going on. And as far as I know, you’re not giving any of the chance to explain themselves with their own oral evidence.
“I don’t think you seriously mean to accuse those individuals of lying and I don’t think you can seriously mean to accuse me of lying.”
He says that there are “some features of this proceeding that are extremely peculiar”.
Johnson takes aim at Harman
Speaking with “utmost respect” to the chair, Harriet Harman, he says: “You have said some things about this matter before reading the evidence, which are plainly and wrongly prejudicial, or prejudge the very issue on which you are adjudicating”.
Mr Johnson’s allies have previously criticised Ms Harman over an April 2022 tweet in which she suggested that by accepting a fine for breaking COVID rules he was also admitting to misleading the House.
“I’m going to put your earlier remarks down to the General Cotton thrust of politics and trust in what you have stressed at the outset, the impartiality that the committee insists upon and then sits upon,” Mr Johnson says.
He adds that so much of the committee’s interrogation is “theoretically irrelevant, but I’m going to take that in my stride because I agree with what you said the outset”.
“It is your job and I want to help you to understand why I said what I said to Parliament and whether I deliberately set out to deceive. And I emphatically did not.” – (SKY NEWS)
Just 29 vote against Windsor Framework
Away from Boris Johnson’s privileges committee appearance, MPs have voted through Rishi Sunak’s Windsor Framework.
Some 515 voted in favour of the deal – and just 29 voted against it.
The eight DUP MPs will most likely have voted against the deal – unless any abstained or are not present.
This means around 21 others voted against the government.
This is despite Mr Johnson, Ms Truss and the ERG saying they would against Mr Sunak.
Johnson begins his opening statement
Boris Johnson starts his statement by telling the chair – Harriet Harman – that he needs to vote in a few minutes. She reminds him that there are many MPs in the House, and that if there is a vote called, they’ll suspend this session to allow them to.
It’s significant though as we are expecting Johnson to vote against the government’s new Windsor Framework later today – the new post-Brexit trade arrangements agreed for Northern Ireland.
He’s rebelling against the government, on their attempts to remedy issues caused by a post-Brexit deal he agreed as prime minister – the Northern Ireland Protocol.
This day is like one big recap of the last four years of Boris Johnson’s career.
Before starting his statement, Johnson was asked by Harman if he believed his written submission the committee has published is true. He said: “I do”.
Johnson goes on to say that on a number of days over 20 months, gatherings took place at Downing Street that “went past the point where they could be said to be necessary for work purposes”.
“That was wrong, I bitterly regret it, I understand the public anger and I continue to apologise for what happened on my watch,” he says.
He says the purpose of this inquiry is not to reopen “so-called Partygate”, it’s to discover whether or not I lied to Parliament, misled colleagues and the country about what I knew and believed about those gatherings.
“I’m here to say to you, hand on heart, that I did not lie to the House.”
Johnson says that before Sue Gray’s report and the outcome of the police investigation were made public there was “a near universal belief” at No 10 that rules and guidance were being complied with.
He says this belief “governed what I said in the House” and that as soon as it was clear this was wrong he corrected the record.
Johnson adds that he was “deeply shocked” when fines were issued by police for gatherings in government buildings.
Johnson said the whole of the No 10 operation “all knew how vital it was to maintain public confidence in the fight against Covid”.
He adds they all knew we should do what they had asked the public to do.
Johnson says the only exception is the testimony of his former aide Dominic Cummings, who he says has “every motive to lie” and is not supported by “documentary evidence”.
He says the committee has not gathered any evidence that he lied, but that it has in fact gathered evidence he did not know the rules were broken.
The former PM says he has asked the committee to publish all the evidence it produced, but it has not.
He also accuses them of refusing to allow his legal team to add their own evidence.
Johnson used his statement to downplay some of the evidence received by the committee about alleged rule-breaking parties.
Photos show him “getting a few words of thanks at a work event”, he said.
Or, Johnson asserted, they show “events which I was never fined for attending”.
If rules were broken, this must have been “obvious” to others – including the current Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak – too, he said.
Johnson claims the committee has “found nothing to show that I was warned in advance that events in No 10 were illegal”.
He also says no-one raised any “anxieties” about any events before or after they took place.
If there had been such an anxiety this “unquestionably would have been escalated to me”, he says. – (BBC)
Hearing starts with clips of BoJo
Harman says the former PM spoke about following Covid rules in No 10 in the Commons more than 30 times
The committee is now watching clips where BoJo allegedly misled the House of Commons.
Key dates are 1 Dec 2021, 8 Dec 2021 and 25 May 2022.
We are looking at whether Johnson corrected errors in good time – Harman
Harman continues to define the scope of the committee’s work.
She says the panel is looking at whether Johnson’s statements were accurate, how “quickly and comprehensively” any misleading statements he made were corrected.
The question is whether any errors were rectified in “good time”, she says. – (BBC)
Committee not relying on Sue Gray report
According to Harman, the committee’s focus is not on the rights and wrongs of the Covid pandemic, but on determining if Boris Johnson was truthful with Parliament.
The committee is composed of four Conservative and three opposition MPs, reflecting the political balance in the House of Commons.
Harman emphasises that the committee operates in a non-partisan manner and prioritises the best interests of Parliament, leaving party interests outside the committee room.
The committee’s main task is to evaluate whether Johnson misled the House, regardless of whether this was intentional or reckless, and if the record was corrected in a timely fashion.
Harman refutes the notion that the committee is reliant on material from Sue Gray’s investigation and clarifies that the former senior civil servant is not a witness.
Harriet Harman opens hearing
Committee Chairwoman, Labour’s Harriet Harman, starts by saying the purpose of the hearing is to decide whether or not Boris Johnson misled the House of Commons, if he committed contempt of the House and if this was intentional or reckless.
She says misleading the House might sound like a technical issue but it’s a matter of great importance.
She says if what ministers tell us is not the truth then we can’t do our job and democracy depends upon trust.
She adds that everyone makes mistakes and when minsters do so they are expected to correct it at the earliest opportunity. – BBC
The Partygate saga continues, as Boris Johnson faces MPs over whether Mr Johnson misled Parliament over parties in Downing Street during lockdown.
