Former UK prime minister Boris Johnson has remained defiant in the face of questioning as a parliamentary committee investigates whether he knowingly misled the House of Commons over parties held by his office during COVID-19 lockdowns.
The meeting began with Mr Johnson swearing an oath of truth on the Bible, followed by his statement of defence in which he said he "bitterly regrets" the events leading to the hearing.
"Hand on heart, I did not lie to the House," he told the committee of MPs from across the political spectrum.
Mr Johnson steadfastly maintained that the statements he gave to the House that the gatherings were within the workplace conduct rules reflected his knowledge at the time.
He said misleading the House was inadvertent, rather than deliberate.
The conundrum that therefore faced the committee was how to prove intent.
Mr Johnson defended his assurances to the House that no rules had been broken, which were later proven false, as accurate to the advice he was given by his advisers at the time.
The committee pointed to several examples of correspondence between Downing Street advisers in which they shared concerns about the gatherings.
Advisers concerned over garden event
One email raised that a "200-odd person invitation for drinks in the garden of No. 10 is somewhat of a comms risk in the current environment".
Mr Johnson denied having knowledge of the invitation or subsequent email.
"You have found nothing to show that I was warned in advance that events in Number 10 were illegal, in fact nothing to show that anyone raised anxieties with me about any event, whether before or after it had taken place."
He said his understanding of the event was that it was "not a party", but a thank you event for staff for their hard work through the pandemic "in a ventilated area – the garden".
Asked for his interpretation of the email evidence, Mr Johnson said the concern was over the optics, not the rules.
"I think he was concerned the impression people might gain if they looked over the garden wall coming from the media room and thought we were doing something other people weren't allowed to do," he said.
The committee put it to Mr Johnson that it should be obvious to him that the gatherings were not essential.
He "strongly disagreed" with that point.
Johnson says events were work, not social in nature
Several of the gatherings Mr Johnson attended have been described as thank yous and send-offs for departing staff. He said "not for one second" did he doubt that addressing staff in person, the implied alternative being by digital means, was inappropriate at the time.
"Hindsight's a wonderful thing," Mr Johnson said. "But no, at the time I thought we were working."
Mr Johnson and the committee engaged in a lengthy back-and-forth over interpretations of the social distancing rules in place at the time of the Number 10 gatherings, as photo evidence of several of the indoor gatherings showed attendees standing close together.
He asserted social distancing was observed as well as possible in the 'higgledy-piggledy' corridors of Number 10.
The committee put it to Mr Johnson that, under the guidelines, workplace activities had to be undertaken with space for people to stay 2 metres apart, or 1 metre with mitigations. If that was impossible, the activity should have been "redesigned or potentially stopped".
Mr Johnson said the photos did not capture the vigorous testing standards or hand sanitiser stands that he considered mitigations, and that the guidelines specified social distancing was required to be observed "wherever possible".
"I accept perfect social distancing is not being observed … but that does not mean the guidelines are not being observed" he said.
"You can't expect human beings in Number 10 to have an electrified invisible fence around them – they will occasionally drift into each other's orbit."
Committee suggests Johnson relied on improper advice
A total of 126 fines were issued to Number 10 staff for breaking COVID-19 rules during the pandemic.
The committee asked Mr Johnson whether he therefore leant on unreliable advisers providing "flimsy" advice, given the amount of rule breaking that was penalised.
Mr Johnson was visibly angered by the accusation he did not take proper advice, raising his voice, stammering over his words and accusing the committee of spouting "utter nonsense".
He said the number of penalties issued showed it wasn't "obvious" to him or to his advisers that rules were being broken at Downing Street.
Mr Johnson said he was "amazed by the number of FPNs (fixed penalty notices)" handed out to staff and was "shocked" to receive his own.
Asked whether that pointed to a degree of recklessness, Mr Johnson disagreed and repeated that it was his understanding that the events were within the rules.
It was also put to Mr Johnson that, given the matter was over compliance with the law, he should have sought legal advice before he gave a statement to parliament.
In reply, Mr Johnson assured the committee he had sought the advice of senior members of staff.
Mr Johnson told the committee in the final minutes of the meeting that it would be "utterly insane" to find him in contempt of parliament.
The committee will continue its investigation, with an outcome not expected until mid-year.
