Dame Andrea Jenkyns, who was identified as one of seven MPs who tried to undermine an inquiry into Boris Johnson's Partygate lies, made a massive gaffe as she began her defence in the Commons this evening.
The Tory MP for Morley and Outwood mistakenly said Magna Carta was issued in June 2015, when in fact it was issued in June 1215. The unfortunate blunder came as she attempted to slap down the Privileges Committee, whose special report named her as one of several MPs who had undertaken a “sustained” and “co-ordinated campaign” to undermine its investigation into Mr Johnson's lies about lockdown-busting parties in No10.
It found that the ex-PM’s pals, including Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, Dame Priti Patel and Nadine Dorries, had wanted to stop the inquiry “coming to a conclusion which the critics did not want”. Several of the named MPs spoke out in defence of their interference during the more than three-hour long debate however it was not enough to persuade their fellow MPs, who overwhelmingly approved the Privileges Committee report without the need for a formal vote.
Meanwhile, during the debate, Tory MP Laura Farris's tribute to Harriet Harman appeared to leave the Privileges Committee chairwoman tearful. Ms Farris applauded Ms Harman's parliamentary career, alongside many other MPs who spoke out against attempts by Mr Johnson's allies to undermine her work.
She said: "Fourteen weeks before she took up that appointment (as committee chairwoman) her husband of 40 years, Jack, had died. Against this background I invite members of the House to consider what is more likely - that she agreed to chair the committee as a final act of service to this House or that she did so because she was interested in pursuing a personal vendetta against Boris Johnson."
Rishi Sunak, who was not present at the debate, was criticised for what Shadow Commons leader Thangam Debbonaire described as a lack of leadership over his response to the Privileges Committee's report into Mr Johnson's conduct.
She told the Commons: "In my view the named MPs should apologise, unfortunately instead, some of them so far have doubled down, claiming that what they've said is merely them exercising their right to freedom of speech. That is absolute nonsense. They tried to interfere in a disciplinary procedure that was voted for unanimously by this House."
She criticised Mr Sunak for being "too weak" to "draw a line" between himself and predecessor Mr Johnson by supporting the sanctions against him, saying: "He could have shown some leadership... but as well as not voting, he couldn't even bring himself to give us a view. If we want to turn the corner, if we want to move on... it matters that the current Prime Minister has failed even to draw a difference between himself and his predecessor."
The Lib Dems had attempted to force a vote on whether the behaviour of the MPs named in the report warranted sanctions, which could include the MPs being suspended from the Commons. However, the Speaker did not select its amendment for a vote.
A Lib Dem source told the Mirror: “The ball is now in Rishi Sunak’s court to hold these Conservative MPs to account for attacking Parliament’s investigation into Boris Johnson’s lies. The government has the power to bring forward a motion and refer these MPs back to the Privileges Committee. If Sunak continues to sit on the fence, his promise to govern with integrity will be left in tatters.”
Those named in the report continued to hold their stance during the debate. Dame Andrea, Tory former minister opened her speech in the Commons, saying: "Magna Carta was issued in June 2015, and was the first document to limit power and formalise the concept that no authority, not even the king, was above the law."
She went on: "My deep concern is that the committee may not have followed this example of just or reasonable power, and has, I believe, in my opinion, taken three roles as judge, jury, and executioner... Actions of this committee could mark a dangerous precedent, a slippery slope. Are we as MPs to be sanctioned for voicing an opinion of the work of members, committees or indeed outcomes of this place? If so, colleagues may want to consider how they vote today, what precedent they set because you may be next."
Conservative former minister Sir Jacob told the Commons: "There are some issues with this report, I think beginning, as it happens, with its title, 'co-ordinated campaign of interference'... there is no evidence that it was co-ordinated."
Tory former cabinet minister Dame Priti Patel similarly told the Commons: "If this House approves this report then it will (set), in my view, a dangerous precedent in approving a report that censures and passes judgment on members of this House without providing any due process, fair due process I should add, to those members that it makes allegations about."
However Conservative Michael Fabricant, who was also named, acknowledged that calling the Privileges Committee a "kangaroo court" was wrong. Making an intervention, Tory MP Alberto Costa (South Leicestershire), who sits on the committee, asked the Lichfield MP: "I notice that on his own Twitter website, there is a tweet from July 31, 2022, where he states 'Harriet Harman determined to stitch up Boris by changing rules of Privileges Committee, kangaroo court'. Does he now accept that referring to the Privileges Committee as a kangaroo court is wrong?"
Mr Fabricant replied: "I don't remember that tweet, but the answer is actually, yes, I do." The MP for Lichfield had earlier said he stood by the comments he made that serious questions will have to be answered in relation to the Committee's procedure.
* Follow Mirror Politics on Snapchat , Tiktok , Twitter and Facebook .
