The privileges committee has reported – and its conclusions exceed even the more damning expectations.
The MPs find Boris Johnson misled the House not just once, but multiple times:
• On 1 December 2021 when reports first surfaced about lockdown-busting parties and he said all rules and guidance were followed in No 10,
• the following week on 8 December, when he repeated that assertion,
• and in January,
• and in May the following year when he was questioned about leaving parties for his staff.
The crux of Mr Johnson’s defence is that others advised him that the gatherings – some of which he did not attend – were within the rules.
But the MPs blow this out of the water, finding not only that he knew more than he let on, but that the impression that “those assurances had been overarching and comprehensive” was, in the MPs’ view, misleading in itself.
Those assurances were given “in haste”, as a line to take by his media advisers, and only in relation to one event – but were applied by the former prime minister more widely.
Their conclusion is that a “serious contempt” occurred and that he misled the house not just recklessly, but knowingly, too – and that this is all the more serious because he was the most senior member of the government.
Mr Johnson’s angry representations are included by the committee in full.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
They condemn his descriptions of the committee as a “kangaroo court” carrying out a “witch hunt” against him, saying his “campaign of abuse and intimidation of committee members … constitutes a further significant contempt”.
The report also contains colourful new details, not seen in the interim report earlier this year, or in Sue Gray’s report last year, showing the disconnect between the tough language of the rules as they applied to the public – and how they were perceived in Downing Street.
We learn that on one occasion Boris Johnson felt he needed to be at a gathering to “steady the ship” after Lee Cain and Dominic Cummings – his former chief advisers – left in “potentially acrimonious circumstances” in November 2020.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Mr Johnson’s resignation as an MP means that the suggested suspension is now academic, but MPs do get the chance to vote on it and are likely to approve it.
It’s now clear why he didn’t stay to fight a by-election in his Uxbridge constituency, which recent polling suggested the Tories could keep.
Mr Johnson himself calls the report “deranged”, while his allies have branded it “appalling”. His supporters among MPs are not particularly numerous – with many MPs now wanting to move on – but they are angry.
Boris Johnson maintains strong support among the party’s grassroots and vocal allies who are prepared to make things difficult for the current prime minister, such as Nadine Dorries. Other MPs are already pledging to speak against the report when a vote is held.
The damning nature of the document, which may put off even some of those MPs still loyal to him, is bad news for his desire to come back. But it’s also dangerous for Rishi Sunak, keen to finally draw a line under partygate.
The vote on this report will be a grim and divisive moment for Conservatives, and Mr Johnson – who has already, somewhat disingenuously, attacked Mr Sunak’s tax policy and failure to try for a US trade deal – may have more grenades to throw.
