A summary of today's developments
Boris Johnson faces being formally reprimanded for recklessly misleading parliament after MPs investigating the Partygate scandal denounced his “flimsy” explanations and suggested he had wrongly interpreted Covid guidance. The former prime minister was left fighting for his political career after a tetchy three-and-a-half-hour evidence session in which he repeatedly claimed No 10 parties, with alcohol and little social distancing, had been “necessary” for work purposes. Harriet Harman, chair of the privileges committee investigating whether Johnson deliberately misled MPs over lockdown gatherings, expressed dismay at the “flimsy nature” of assurances he received that events were within the rules.
Rishi Sunak’s financial records have been released to the public on the same day as the earlier vote on the Windsor Framework and the televised inquisition of Johnson. According to the release, he paid more than £1m in tax over the past three financial years. This included paying £432,493 in the 2021/22 financial year. Between his income and capital gains, Sunak made £4,766,962 in the past three financial years. This includes £3,760,588 made from a US-based blind investment fund - for which tax was paid in the US, as well as some in the UK.
Twenty-two Conservative MPs voted against the government on the Northern Ireland protocol deal. There were also 48 Tory MPs who did not vote.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, told the World at One he would vote against the government even though he was in favour of the Stormont brake, which he said “could turn out to be useful”. He was voting against because “unfortunately” the government was treating this as a vote on the principle of the Northern Ireland protocol deal as a whole.
The Conservative party deputy chair Lee Anderson has revealed he will be paid £100,000 a year for hosting a show on GB News, PA Media reports.
Thank you for following today’s liveblog. Here is tonight’s main story:
Updated
Boris Johnson faces being formally reprimanded for recklessly misleading parliament after MPs investigating the Partygate scandal denounced his “flimsy” explanations and suggested he had wrongly interpreted Covid guidance.
The former prime minister was left fighting for his political career after a tetchy three-and-a-half-hour evidence session in which he repeatedly claimed No 10 parties, with alcohol and little social distancing, had been “necessary” for work purposes.
Harriet Harman, the chair of the privileges committee investigating whether Johnson deliberately misled MPs over lockdown gatherings, expressed dismay at the “flimsy nature” of assurances he received that events were within the rules.
Bernard Jenkin, a senior Conservative MP on the committee, told him that the cross-party group of MPs did not agree with his interpretation of the guidance. “The guidance does not say you can have a thank you party and as many people in the room as you like,” he added.
Jacob Rees-Mogg MP claims Boris Johnson “has won in the court of public opinion” following his partygate inquiry grilling.
The arch-loyalist of the former prime minister told Channel 4 News: “I think that if Boris Johnson went to a by-election he would win it comfortably. Because I think he’s winning in the court of public opinion, who see this as a kangaroo court.”
He also said: “It was quite clear that he behaved properly, that he told the truth as he understood it at the time, as he had been advised. He told the truth as he perceived it.”
When it was put to him that Johnson appeared rattled during the hearing, Rees-Mogg said: “I thought actually he modelled himself on a cucumber and was pretty cool.”
Rishi Sunak was accused of sneaking out details of his tax affairs on a busy news day by the Liberal Democrats.
The party’s Cabinet Office spokesperson Christine Jardine said: “After months of promising to release his tax returns, I don’t understand why Rishi Sunak has snuck them out whilst the world is distracted with Boris Johnson’s partygate grilling.
“People will be much more concerned today about the staggering tax hikes Rishi Sunak has imposed on them.
“The blunt truth is that we should judge politicians on their actions, not their wealth. Rishi Sunak will be remembered as the tax-hiking Prime Minister and no Boris Johnson distraction will stop that.”
Conservative Party chairman Greg Hands defended Sunak’s high tax bill.
It was put to him that the amount the Prime Minister paid in tax – £432,500 in 2021/22 – was about 13 times what most people earn.
Hands told ITV’s Peston: “We want to have, in this country, wealthy people paying a lot of tax.
“So, I think we should be proud of the fact that people are paying tax in this country and proud of the fact they’re financing our excellent public services.”
Boris Johnson’s former boss and ex-editor of the Daily Telegraph Max Hastings has told Andrew Marr:: “I don’t think you can write off Boris Johnson until he is buried at a crossroads with a stake driven through his heart… he is a blight on not only on the Conservative Party, but on the British body politick.”
Speaking on Tonight with Andrew Marr on LBC, Hastings said: “We have to hope that the Johnson era is going to come to be perceived in the years ahead as a sort of dreadful aberration, as something that the British people realised was a disaster, and that the Conservative Party now has the courage to realise was disaster and to send Boris Johnson back where he belongs to the music halls… He had no place In British public life.”
Hastings added he would find it hard to be “civil to any member of the [Johnson] family because what grief they brought on our country.”
Updated
Sir Chris Bryant, a Labour MP who was formerly the chair of the privileges committee, believes Boris Johnson said “for the first time” that “social distancing didn’t really happen in Downing Street”.
During his evidence, Johnson spoke about how it was difficult to stay two metres away from people due to the cramped nature of the Nuo 10 building but the guidance and rules were followed to the best of peoples’ ability.
Bryant told Sky News the rules “didn’t say ‘as long as you’re doing your best’”, adding that Downing Street “is pretty large” and not that cramped.
Updated
From Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on her interview with Tory chair Greg Hands.
Is Boris Johnson a man of integrity?
— Sophy Ridge (@SophyRidgeSky) March 22, 2023
Greg Hands: “I think Boris is a man who is reasonably well known”
My full interview with Conservative Party Chairman Greg Hands 9pm @skynews #Ridge pic.twitter.com/LSSizF7hvZ
Updated
The deputy Scottish first minister, John Swinney, has called for parliamentarians to work better with those in other parties, in what is expected to be his last speech on the government’s frontbench.
Swinney announced last month he would resign alongside Nicola Sturgeon.
Closing a debate on the wellbeing economy on Wednesday – in what is likely to be his final contribution as a minister – Swinney said: “I told the first minister some months ago that I intended to step down at the end of the period with which I have temporarily returned to the finance and economy remit, and I fear that I may have prompted the first minister to do some reflection of her own at the same time.”
He added: “After 16 years in office, I have to say I was rather surprised from time to time that more people were not asking why I was still here.”
Updated
Here are more details on Rishi Sunak publishing his long-awaited tax documents, showing that he paid more than £1m in UK tax over the previous three financial years.
It showed that he paid £432,493 in tax in the 2021/2022 financial year, £393,217 in 2020-2021, and £227,350 in 2019-20.
The former California resident separately paid 6,892 US dollars from 45,948 US dollars of dividends that were taxed separately in the US in 2021.
Sunak made nearly £2m through income and capital gains in 2021-22.
His income from dividends was £172,415, and from capital gains was £1.6m. Most of that related to a US-based investment fund listed as a blind trust, according to the summary.
His total investment income that year was more than double his MP’s salary of £81,908.
Rather than a full tax return, No 10 published “a summary” of Sunak’s UK taxable income, capital gains and tax paid as reported to HM Revenue & Customs, prepared by accountancy service Evelyn Partners.
Critics questioned the timing of the release, accusing No 10 of attempting to bury the tax statement under other headlines.
Updated
Commenting after Boris Johnson gave evidence to the privileges pommittee, SNP Westminster deputy leader Mhairi Black said:
“This hearing was utterly excruciating for Boris Johnson, whose mask slipped under interrogation and whose absurd claims were exposed as not remotely credible. Most people watching will conclude it’s now beyond doubt that the Tory former prime minister not only broke the law but also deliberately misled parliament.
If the privileges committee does conclude that Boris Johnson misled parliament, then Rishi Sunak will have no choice but to withdraw the whip permanently - or he will show he’s weak, unprincipled and lacks the integrity to be Prime Minister.
“The growing stench of Tory sleaze and corruption shows the Westminster system is broken beyond repair. With the pro-Brexit, pro-cuts Labour party little more than a pound shop Tory tribute act, it’s clear independence is the only way for Scotland to escape Westminster control and deliver the real change we need.”
Updated
Nadine Dorries, the former culture secretary and leading Johnsonite cheerleader, thinks the former PM will exonerated following his appearance at the privileges committee.
.@BorisJohnson very clear today. Not sure there is a reasonable person in the land who would think that the committee could do anything other than totally exonerate him and not before time either.
— Rt Hon Nadine Dorries MP (@NadineDorries) March 22, 2023
It goes without saying, this is not a consensus view.
That’s all from me for today. My colleague Nadeem Badshah is now taking over.
Boris Johnson is being compared to Donald Trump for his refusal to say he will accept the findings of the committee if it does not clear him. (See 5.12pm.) This is from my colleague Jonathan Freedland.
Trumpian answer from Johnson: his view of the legitimacy of the Commons privileges committee will depend on whether they clear him or not
— Jonathan Freedland (@Freedland) March 22, 2023
Tory deputy chair Lee Anderson to be paid £100,000 a year for hosting GB News show
The Conservative party deputy chair Lee Anderson has revealed he will be paid £100,000 a year for hosting a show on GB News, PA Media reports. PA says:
The annual fee, declared in an update to the MPs’ register of interests published on Wednesday, is a significant increase on the £200 weekly payment he received for appearing as a regular on Dan Wootton’s show.
The controversial MP for Ashfield, in Nottinghamshire, became the fifth Tory MP to host a GB News show when his deal with the channel was announced on 7 March.
He joins fellow Conservatives Jacob Rees-Mogg, Esther McVey and Philip Davies, who all currently host shows. Bishop Auckland MP Dehenna Davison previously hosted a show but left when she was made a levelling up minister.
Updated
Nick Robinson, the Today presenter and former BBC political editor, also concludes that the committee will conclude Boris Johnson recklessly misled MPs.
No-one watching the quizzing of @BorisJohnson can be in any doubt that the committee will now conclude that he recklessly misled MPs by repeating & relying on assurances that rules and guidance had not been broken inside Downing Street 1/3
— Nick Robinson (@bbcnickrobinson) March 22, 2023
The case that Johnson wilfully or recklessly misled MPs looks set to be that he saw some of these events with his own eyes; ignored social distancing & relied on assurances that they didn’t break the rules from political aides rather than lawyers or officials 2/3
— Nick Robinson (@bbcnickrobinson) March 22, 2023
If I’m right the issue will be whether Johnson’s defence has done anything to persuade MPs to minimise the sanctions against him 3/3
— Nick Robinson (@bbcnickrobinson) March 22, 2023
Updated
Jason Groves, the political editor of the Daily Mail, says he thinks the committee will find against Boris Johnson.
Pretty clear that the privileges committee is going to find Boris Johnson guilty. Harriet Harman says he relied on 'flimsy' reassurances, Bernard Jenkin says he 'did not take proper advice' before telling Parliament that no lockdown rules were broken
— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) March 22, 2023
Updated
Boris Johnson's evidence to privileges committee – snap verdict
In its report earlier this month the privileges committee said that it would consider whether Boris Johnson misled the house and, if so, it would consider “whether that was inadvertent, reckless or intentional”. On the basis of that evidence session, and all the written evidence that has been released, it seems likely that Johnson will go down on recklessness.
That will be enough to trigger a sanction. But it does not have to be a suspension of 10-days or more, and it is not hard to see why the committee might opt for a lesser punishment. There has been little or no evidence to back up claims there was a conspiracy to lie to MPs. The committee will want to produce a report and recommendation acceptable to as much as the Commons as possible. And any sanction at all on a former PM like this would be unprecedented. That would serve as warning to ministers in future that they need to take their obligations to parliament a lot more seriously than Johnson.
On the whole, the committee did a good job. It is still not clear why the committee did not ask about the Abba party, but it ran to time, the questions were robust, it never became partisan and the Conservatives on the committee gave the impression that they are not minded to be intimidated by a write-in campaign organised by grassroots Johnsonite extremists.
We did not learn any great new facts. But the MPs were good at testing the robustness of Johnson’s arguments, and two exchanges were particularly revealing. First, Sir Bernard Jenkin established quite effectively that Johnson’s understanding of what the guidance actually meant was so elastic as to cover not taking any notice of the guidance at all. (See 3.08pm.) And his question about what Johnson would have said if asked at a press conference if a crowded drinks do was allowed in a workplace under the Covid guidance was one of the best of the day. Johnson’s reply was wholly unconvincing. (See 3.33pm.)
The other key exchange came when Harriet Harman expressed dismay at Johnson telling MPs all rules and guidance were followed on the basis of such “flimsy” evidence. (See 4.54pm.) If you want to locate the gravamen of the committee’s final report, it is probably in that exchange.
Johnson was curt and abrupt. He did not quite lose his temper, but it was probably a mistake to take a swipe at Harman’s integrity and it should not have taken him as long as it did to disown the “kangaroo court” smears cast out by his supporters. Normally, in circumstances like this, unabashed humility goes down best. And honesty. One of the revealing lines from him came when he said that perhaps he should have been a bit more candid with the Commons last December when asked to explain to what extent guidance was followed in Number 10. (See 4.28pm.)
Even commentators well disposed towards Johnson (like the Telegraph’s Christopher Hope) are finding it hard to pretend that was a triumph. Johnson lost his job partly as a result of Partygate, and the Brexiter Tory faction he now leads has, on the basis of today’s vote (see 3.20pm), been reduced to oddball rump of 22. When the committee has to decide what punishment is appropriate, it will take into account mitigating factors, and one reason not to trigger the recall process might be that a return to frontline politics for him seems increasingly unlikely anyway.
Updated
Harman says the questions are all over.
She asks if Johnson has any final points to make.
Johnson says he has “much enjoyed” the discussion.
Someone in the room laughs loudly.
Harman says the committee will consider what he has said.
But it may take other written or oral evidence, she says.
And with that she closes the session.
Harriet Harman says “finally” she wants to address the point about when Johnson corrected the record.
Q: You said when you corrected the record that at gatherings you attended that the guidance had been followed at all times. Will you correct that?
Johnson says the rules were followed. And it was his belief at the time that the guidance was followed “and it remains my belief”.
Q: What is your belief now?
Johnson says he does not want to dissent from what he said in 25 May last year.
Q: Do you accept that there was a degree of recklessness?
Johnson says nobody wants to tell the Commons something that is not true.
What he said was based on his genuine understanding and belief, he says.
It was not obvious to him there were problems with some events, and it was not obvious to some others too.
Johnson says his supporters should not be calling committee kangaroo court
Sir Charles Walker (Con) goes next.
He asks about Conservative Post, the pro-Johnson website. The website has run a campaign against the privileges committee inquiry. Yet when the Commons voted to hold this inquiry, the government, led by Johnson at the time, did not oppose it.
Johnson confirms that.
Q: So it is misleading for Conservative Post to criticise Tory MPs for not opposing the inquiry.
Johnson accepts that.
Q: On 14 June 2022 there was a motion to add Harriet Harman to the committee. When the motion was put, not a single MP objected? Is that right?
Of course, says Johnson.
Q: So if MPs did have concerns about the committee, someone would have objected?
Johnson says he has said what he has said about the concern about Harman being impartial. He says he has come to the committee confident it will be impartial.
Q: Your supporters seem to want it both ways. They are hoping the committee will exonerate you. But just in case it doesn’t, they want to delegitimise us. Do you see us as a kangaroo court?
Johnson says the committee can tell from the respect he has shown it how he views it. This is the body that decides these matters. He does not think the committee can find he wittingly misled parliament.
Q: Do you regret your supporters have called the committee a kangaroo court?
Johnson says there should be no attempt to intimidate the committee.
Q: So do you regret that?
Johnson says he deprecates that term. (It is one used by Jacob Rees-Mogg just today – see 1.57am.)
Alberto Costa intervenes.
Q: Do you think the committee could be wrong, but still fair?
Johnson says it would have been “insane” for him to lie to the Commons. He says he is sure the committee will find in its favour.
Asked if he will accept it is acting in good faith if it doesn’t, Johnson says he will wait to see what it concludes.
UPDATE: Johnson said:
I think if this committee were to find me in contempt of parliament – having come and done something so utterly insane and contrary to my beliefs and my principles as to come here, to come to parliament and wittingly lie – I think that would be not only unfair, I think it would be wrong.
Updated
Back at the committee, Sir Bernard Jenkin (Con) says if he was accused of law breaking, and if he had to speak to the Commons, he would want legal advice.
Johnson says he was not accused of law breaking.
Q: Jenkin says, if he was accused of breaking rules, he would want to “copperplate” his assurances by taking proper advice. But he did not.
Johnson says before the first PMQs he thought Keir Starmer would not bother to ask about the story.
He asks the relevant people, senior people, about the matter.
Q: You did not ask the cabinet secretary.
Johnson says he asked the cabinet secretary on 7 December to investigate.
Updated
Rishi Sunak paid more than £400,000 in tax last year, tax return shows
Turning away from the hearing for a moment, ITV’s Robert Peston has the headline figures from Rishi Sunak’s tax return.
The PM paid tax last year of £432,493. His income and tax info is attached. It amounts quite simply to confirmation of what we know, namely he is relatively wealthy. His capital gains last year were £1.64m and his dividend income was 172,415, which implies his share holdings… pic.twitter.com/68Q3Yz9Top
— Robert Peston (@Peston) March 22, 2023
Harriet Harman tells Johnson assurances he relied on when speaking to MPs were 'flimsy'
Harriet Harman says she was in the Commons at the time when she heard him talk about his assurances. MPs thought they were serious assurances.
Yet they were from political advisers, not civil servants; the advisers had their own doubts; the assurances covered rules, not guidance; and they only covered one event, she says.
So can you see why MPs are dismayed about the “flimsy nature” of these assurance, she asks.
Johnson disputes this. He says Jack Doyle and James Slack had both given assurances about Christmas drinks event.
Johnson says Doyle did not tell him that he (Doyle) had doubts about the event.
He says if the committee tells him he cannot rely on advice from people like Doyle and Slack, it would be difficult for government to carry on.
UPDATE: Harman said:
It is a bit hard to understand what the nature of an assurance is when you’ve been there and seen it with your own eyes.
If I was going at 100mph and I saw the speedometer saying 100mph, it would be a bit odd, wouldn’t it, if I said someone assured me that I wasn’t, because it is what you’ve seen with your own eyes.
Do you actually think that we would be entitled to be a bit dismayed about the flimsy nature of this assurance when we took it at face value that these assurances amounted to something, and it looks, from what you’ve told us in answer to Mr Costa’s questions, that they did not amount to much at all.
Updated
Q: Some might see your reliance on the purported assurances you received as a “deflection mechanism”.
Johnson says that would be a “completely ridiculous” assessment.
Q: You relied on Jack Doyle’s assurances. But he himself was doubtful about the events complying with the guidance. Look at the messages on page 79 of the bundle. He was “struggling” to come up with a way the gathering was within the rules. Did you know he had doubts about that?
Johnson says he was not aware of that. Doyle did not send that WhatsApp to him. And it was on 25 January, long after the reports first came in.
He says Doyle was not at the June 2020 event.
Updated
Johnson confirms he was not told explicitly that 18 December Christmas drinks were within Covid guidance
Q: Is it right that you received no assurances that the event on 18 December 2020 complied with Covid guidance? Jack Doyle made this point in written evidence. (See 11.31am.)
Johnson says that was correct. But nobody had said anything “adverse about the guidance”, he says. (In other words, he says he was not told it was against the guidance either.)
Updated
Alberto Costa (Con) is asking the questions now.
He asks Johnson to name the officials who gave him assurances about the rules being observed.
Johnson will not say.
Harriet Harman asks if that is because he can’t remember, or because he wants to protect their privacy.
Johnson says he can recall at least one official making this point in a meeting.
Costa asks him to confirm this in writing if he does not want to name the person publicly.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Johnsonite and former business secretary, has doubled down on his claim that the privileges committee is a kangaroo court.
Boris is doing very well against the marsupials.
— Jacob Rees-Mogg (@Jacob_Rees_Mogg) March 22, 2023
And Mark Jenkinson, another Tory MP loyal to Johnson, has thrown an even worse insult at the committee; he has accused them of being middle-class.
Committee questions already coming across from a very middle class, privileged perspective - Q’s no doubt written by those who could go for their daily hour walk without leaving their own garden
— Mark Jenkinson MP 🇬🇧 (@markjenkinsonmp) March 22, 2023
You’d get a very different perspective from frontline & blue collar workers
(Some of us are old enough to remember the days when the Conservative party was proud of being middle-class.)
Updated
Johnson says if members of the public had seen the gathering in the Downing Street garden in May 2020, they would have thought he was allowing staff to do something that he was not allowing them to do.
Johnson suggests he should have told MPs following guidance did not, to him, meaning following it perfectly
Q: Do you accept that you were told by Martin Reynolds not to say guidance was followed at all times? (See 10.20am.)
Johnson says Reynolds was being cautious. But he was talking about social distancing at No 10, he says.
The division bell has gone off. But Harriet Harman says they don’t need to vote, and so the session continues.
Johnson says Reynolds was not saying the guidance was not being followed. They were following the guidance with mitigation.
Q: Given that you said you would take out the reference to guidance, do you think you should have corrected the record?
No, says Johnson. He says he did not think anyone had broken the guidance.
Q: In your written statement you say perfect compliance with the guidance was not necessary. If so, why did you not tell the Commons at the time?
Johnson says that is a “very good question”. As Bernard Jenkin said earlier (see 3.08pm), he says, it might have been better if he had spelt out to MPs when he meant by saying the guidance was followed at all time.
In his statement yesterday Johnson said:
It was not always possible to observe perfect social distancing. As I have explained above, that was envisaged and provided for in the guidance.
Updated
Johnson says by 8 December 2021 he realised he was getting 'conflicting information' about Christmas drinks year before
Q: Why did you not tell the Commons there had been other events in No 10?
Johnson says he did not think they were of concern, or were against the rules and guidance.
Q: The following week, the night before PMQs, ITV published the Allegra Stratton video. What did you do in the week between 1 December and 8 December to prepare for further questions on this?
Johnson says, when the Stratton video emerged, he decided he was getting “conflicting information” about what happened at the event on 18 December 2020. He asked the cabinet secretary to conduct an inquiry.
Harriet Harman says they have considered the rules and guidance at the time, his knowledge of that, and his attendance at events.
Now they will focus on what he told MPs.
Andy Carter (Con) is asking the questions now.
Q: The Daily Mirror approached No 10 on 30 November 2021 about lockdown-busting parties. You must have expected to be asked about this at PMQs, and you were. You said all guidance was followed at No 10. You knew what the guidance was. And you knew there had been events where social distancing was not maintained, and masks were not worn. So why did you tell MPs all guidance was followed?
Johnson says there was no guidance for masks indoors.
Q: That would have been mitigation.
Johnson says no one raised concerns about this before then.
He says he spoke to Jack Doyle, his then communications director, about the event (the press office pre-Christmas do). He says he asked Doyle to describe it. It was a horrendous and difficult evening, with the Kent variant taking off. People were sitting at their desks. They were drinking, but that was allowed. He says:
I concluded that it sounded to me that the event was both within the rules and the guidance.
He said the guidance had been followed completely within No 10. He was misremembering the line put out by the press office. He says he did not think the public made a distinction between rules and guidance.
Q: Why did you not correct the record if you said guidance instead of rules?
Johnson says he did not think there was any “appreciable difference”.
Updated
Dorans is now asking about the event in the press office (a pre-Christmas party, according to some accounts) in No 10 on 18 December 2020.
Johnson says he was not aware of that happening. He did not hear it.
Q: Did anyone tell you about it afterwards?
No, says Johnson. In the year that followed, “the thing was a complete blank to me”.
Allan Dorans (SNP) is asking the questions now.
He asks about a leaving do on 14 January 2021. A picture was included in the committee’s report earlier this month. He says the Met imposed fines in relation to this.
Johnson says this involved people who worked together every day. He mentions the names of the two officials, and then says he should not have named them. People met there briefly. It was his job to thank them, and show them they were appreciated, he says.
Here is the picture.
Q: A witness said it was not necessary for work. The quote is on page 47 of the evidence bundle.
Johnson says he does not agree.
Updated
Boris Johnson says Lee Cain concerned about 'optics' of Downing Street garden drinks event
Fovargue says Lee Cain, communications director at the time, objected to the idea of having a drinks event in the No 10 garden in May 2020.
Johnson says Cain raised concerns about the optics.
Q: Why would he have been concerned about the optics if was within the rules?
Johnson says he might have been worried about people seeing it happening.
Q: Cain says now the event was purely social.
Johnson says he does not recall Cain saying that at the time.
Updated
Boris Johnson says birthday gathering in June 2020 was 'reasonably necessary' for work purposes
Harriet Harman says they now want to ask about the events in May and June in 2020.
Yvonne Fovargue (Lab) is asking the questions now.
She starts with the 19 June gathering in the cabinet room – the impromptu birthday event. At least 17 people were there, she says, including his wife and interior designer.
Johnson says his wife and son were there, and a “contractor who was in the building” attended very briefly.
Q: Why did they have to be there for work purposes?
Johnson says he thought this was reasonably necessary for work purposes because he was standing at his desk, and about to have a meeting.
Q: Presumably your wife and the contractor were not attending that meeting?
Johnson says at No 10 the PM’s family have access to the building.
Q: Shouldn’t it have been obvious that they were not there?
No, says Johnson. He says the press office publicised the fact it took place. No one said it should not have taken place. And Rishi Sunak was there too, he says.
Updated
Jenkin says the guidance said people should only attend workplace events in person if it was necessary for them to be there.
Johnson says the guidance said that was usually the case.
Johnson claims it is “unlikely” that he said, at a particular leaving do, that it was the “the most unsocially distanced gathering in the UK right now”.
The hearing has resumed. Bernard Jenkin asks about an event, and Boris Johnson suggests fewer people were there than Jenkin suggested, saying Sue Gray said just 15 or 20.
Jenkin jokes about Johnson now relying on Sue Gray.
That is a reference to his allies saying three weeks ago that her report was now unreliable because she was going to work for Keir Starmer.
Johnson suggests 'unsocially distanced farewell gatherings' were allowed at work under Covid guidance
This is what Boris Johnson said to Sir Bernard Jenkin when Jenkin asked him what he would have said if he had been asked what he would say to any business that wanted to hold “unsocially distanced farewell gatherings” during lockdown.
Johnson replied:
I would have said it is up to organisations, as the guidance says, to decide how they are going to implement the guidance amongst them. Where they can’t do social distancing perfectly, they can’t maintain two metres or one metre, they are entitled to have mitigations. And we did indeed have plenty of mitigations.
(I don’t think anyone did ask during the press conferences if crowded leaving dos were OK under the rules. That is because, to most people, the answer was obvious. And although Johnson claims he would have answered in these terms, Prof Sir Chris Whitty would surely have given a very different answer.)
Updated
22 Tory MPs vote against government on NI protocol deal, division list reveals
Twenty-two Conservative MPs voted against the government on the Northern Ireland protocol deal, the division list reveals. The full list of names is here.
There were also 48 Tory MPs who did not vote. Some of them will have had permission not to vote, but some will have been abstaining intentionally.
Updated
The division bell has just gone off. There is another vote, this time on the public order bill.
That means we’ve got another 15 minute break.
Jenkin says in other places around the country people were not having leaving dos. So why was it acceptable in No 10?
Johnson says that event was not a party.
Jenkin says he did not call it a party.
Johnson says he did earlier on.
Q: So if you had been asked at a press conference to hold unsocially distanced events in a workplace, what would you have said?
Johnson says he would have urged people where possible to observe the 2-metre rule.
Updated
Jenkin says the pictures from the Lee Cain leaving event do not show any work being done.
Johnson says he believes events like this were necessary for work.
Johnson says Covid guidance allowed exemptions, and Jenkin says if he had said this to MPs, inquiry might not be happening
Jenkin asks Johnson to confirm that, the fact that people were standing close together, meant the guidance was not being followed.
Johnson does not accept that. He says the guidance allowed exemptions.
It did not mean to me that we breached the guidance. It means that we were following the guidance to the best of our ability, which was what the guidance provided for. And the guidance provides for freedoms within the practical framework of the operation, or the business, to decide how you’re going to implement the guidance.
Jenkin says, if Johnson said this to the House of Commons, instead of saying the guidance was followed at all times, they would probably not be sitting here having this inquiry.
(Johnson’s argument, also set out in his statement yesterday, seems to be that the guidance allowed you to ignore the guidance.)
Updated
Boris Johnson says No 10 leaving do was 'essential for work purposes'
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Con) is leading the questions now.
He starts by asking Johnson to confirm that he understood the “hands, face, space” guidance. Johnson confirms he did.
Jenkin asks about the photographs from the 13 November event (the Lee Cain leaving drinks). People were standing close together. Jenkin says this shows guidance was being ignored.
Johnson says, as he argued in his opening statement, it was not always possible to maintain that distancing in No 10.
This is what he said on this in his opening statement:
What was in my head, was based on my understanding of the rules and the guidance. That did not mean that I believed that social distancing was complied with perfectly. That is because I and others in the building did not believe that it was necessary or possible to have a 2-metre or after June 24 2020 1-metre electrified forcefield around every human being. Indeed, that is emphatically not what the guidance prescribes.
It specifically says that social distancing should be maintained where possible, having regard to the work environment, and it is clear that in No 10 we had real difficulties in both working efficiently and at speed and in maintaining perfect social distancing. It is a cramped, narrow, 18th-century townhouse. We had no choice but to meet, day in, day out, seven days a week, in an unrelenting battle against Covid. I had to call meetings on the spot, and to take a great many high-speed decisions.
The photo from the Cain leaving do shows Johnson appearing to toast staff with a drink. Asked about it, he said: “I believe it was absolutely essential for work purposes.”
He justified it as “necessary” because two members of staff were leaving “in potentially acrimonious circumstances”.
“I accept that perfect social distancing is not being observed but that does not mean that what we were doing is incompatible with the guidance,” he added.
Updated
Harriet Harman says, before she takes questions, she wants to address one point his lawyer made to the committee.
She says the committee did not accept as evidence notes taken by Sue Gray from her interviews with officials before giving those officials a chance to check the notes. But if they do approve them, the committee will look at them.
Boris Johnson welcomes this.
Harman says the committee will publish the correspondence relating to this on its website.
(Reminder: about three weeks ago Johnson’s allies were saying the committee should not be relying on Gray’s report because the fact she was now taking a job with Keir Starmer meant she was tainted.)
Updated
Johnson says he is proud to have given leadership. And that is what he was doing at all the events he attended.
He ends by saying he hopes the committee will conclude he did not mislead the Commons.
Back at the privileges committee, Boris Johnson is still delivering his opening statement. Largely it echoes what he said in his written statement yesterday.
Sunak wins vote on Northern Ireland protocol deal, with only 29 MPs voting against
Back in the Commons, the result of the Northern Ireland protocol vote has been announced. The government won by 515 votes to 29 – a majority of 486.
Assuming all or most of the eight DUP MPs voted against the government, as they said they would, that implies that just over 20 Tories voted against the government. That amounts to a moderate-sized rebellion, but not one that would wipe out the government’s majority.
We will get the full division list soon.
Updated
Johnson suggests Harriet Harman, the privileges committee chair, is biased against him
Johnson says some aspects of this hearing are “extremely peculiar”.
He says Harriet Haman herself has said things that are “plainly and wrongly prejudicial, or prejudge the very issue you are adjudicating”, he says.
(In most court setting, it is a brave – and not always wise – move to accuse the judge of being biased. Johnson did not make this argument in his statement yesterday, but today he is being more confrontational.)
Johnson goes on to say that this may have been part of the thrust of politics, and he acknowledges what Harman said earlier about being impartial. He says he will help her do her job.
Updated
Johnson says committee is in effect accusing civil servants and advisers of 'lying' about Partygate too
The committee has resumed.
Boris Johnson is still making his opening statement.
He says, if the committee thinks it should have been obvious to Johnson that rules were being broken, then the committee is in effect accusing civil servants of lying about what was happening too.
And they do not have the chance to give evidence to defend themselves, he says.
Johnson evidence paused as MPs vote on NI protocol
The division bell has gone, summoning MPs to vote on the Northern Ireland protocol. Harman suspends the committee hearing to allow MPs to vote.
A division normally takes 15 minutes, but the committee will resume when all eight relevant MPs – the seven committee members, and Boris Johnson – are back, which could be sooner.
Updated
Johnson says if it should have been obvious to him rules were broken, it should have been obvious to Rishi Sunak too
Johnson says people think the photographs published show him breaking the rules. That is not the case.
He says they show him giving a few words of thanks at a work event for a leaving colleage.
And they show a few people standing together, as was permitted if social distancing was not possible.
He says, if it should have been obvious to him that the rules were being broken (which is the central argument in the report published by the committee earlier last month), then it should have been obvious to other people in the building too, “including the current prime minister”.
Johnson claims privileges committee's approach to publishing evidence 'manifestly unfair'
Johnson says he wanted to included in the bundle published today by the committee evidence that would support his defence. That is “manifestly unfair”, he argues.
Johnson says Sue Gray told him twice she did not think Partygate events passed 'threshold of criminality'
Johnson says he believed what he told MPs.
As soon as it was clear he was wrong, he came to the Commons and corrected the record.
He could not have corrected the earlier because he did not know what the outcome of the inquiries would be. He says he was told on a couple of occasions by Sue Gray “that she did not think the threshold of criminality had been reached”.
I was deeply shocked when fines were issued, not least because I had been told on a couple of occasions at least, by Sue Gray, that she did not think the threshold of criminality had been reached.
(It is not clear from this whether he means Gray told him that she thought he did not commit a criminal offence, or whether she told him she thought no one committed a criminal offence.)
Updated
Johnson tells MPs – 'hand on heart, I did not lie to the house'
Boris Johnson says a vote will take place soon. He suggests they wait for that until he starts his opening statement.
Harman declines his suggestion, and invites him to proceed.
Johnson starts his opening statement.
I am here to say to you, hand on heart, I did not lie to the house.
UPDATE: Johnson said:
As you have said chair, the purpose of this inquiry is not to reopen so-called partygate.
It is to discover whether or not I lied to parliament, willingly misled colleagues and the country about what I knew and believed about those gatherings when I said the rules and the guidance had been followed at No 10.
I’m here to say to you hand on heart that I did not lie to the House.
When those statements were made, they were made in good faith and on the basis on what I honestly knew and believed at the time.
Updated
Johnson swears oath promising to tell truth as he commences his evidence
Harman says the committee will not reach conclusions until it has heard evidence from Boris Johnson.
She asks the clerk to administer the oath to Boris Johnson.
He swears with his hand on the Bible that the evidence he will give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Updated
Harman says she wants to show people what Boris Johnson said at the time at PMQs about Partygate.
She shows a video with extracts.
This is unusual for a select committee hearing. But it is reminiscent of how the US House of Representative committee investigating the 6 January attack on the Capitol presented evidence to the public.
Harman says the committee will consider both whether the rules and the guidance were followed.
(In his statement yesterday, Boris Johnson argued that only compliance with the rules was strictly relevant.)
Harman says the MPs on the committee “leave our party interests at the door of the committee room”. They are acting in the interests of the house.
They will look at whether what Boris Johnson said was correct, and how quickly it was correct if it was not. And if MPs were misled, they will consider if this was intentional.
She says there has been comment about the committee relying on the Sue Gray report material. It isn’t. The committee collected evidence from witnesses on oath. This has been disclosed to Johnson, she says.
Updated
Harriet Harman, the chair of the committee, is making an opening statement.
She stresses the importance of ministers telling the truth to MPs.
Misleading MPs recklessly or intentionally impedes the functioning of the Commons, and is a contempt of parliament, she says.
She says the Commons has asked the committee to look at whether Boris Johnson told the truth about Covid parties at No 10. It goes to the heart of the trust on which parliament depends.
UPDATE: Harman said:
Misleading the house might sound like a technical issue, but it is a matter of great importance.
Our democracy is based on parliament scrutinising legislation and holding the government to account for its actions.
We proceed on the basis that what we are told by ministers is accurate. parliament expects proactive candour and transparency.
If what ministers tell us is not the truth, we can’t do our job.
Our democracy depends upon trust that what ministers tell MPs in the House of Commons is the truth. And without that trust, our entire parliamentary democracy is undermined.
Updated
The privileges committee is ready for Boris Johnson, but he has not taken his seat yet.
Rishi Sunak will publish his tax return later today, ITV’s Robert Peston reports.
The PM’s long awaited tax return will be published at 4 today, i understand. You tell me why he chose such a busy day
— Robert Peston (@Peston) March 22, 2023
Sunak has been promising to publish this ever since he became PM. If he has to choose a day like today to publish it (“burying bad news”, in spin terminology), presumably there is something in it he will find embarrassing.
Privileges committee 'make kangaroo courts look respectable', says Rees-Mogg
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons speaker, urged MPs today not to interfere with the privileges committee process. (See 11.25am.) In his interview with the World at One Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, certainly ignored the spirit of what Hoyle was saying, if not the letter, by saying the committee “makes kangaroo courts look respectable”. He told the programme:
I think [the committee] makes kangaroo courts look respectable.
I think Harriet Harman’s position is absurd ... that after Chris Bryant recused himself, quite rightly, she should not possibly have taken on the role when she’d expressed her view clearly beforehand.
Whatever happens in the privileges committee, he will win in the court of public opinion.
Rees-Mogg was referring to various tweets posted by Harman last year that critics argue show she has already made up her mind about this case.
Updated
Boris Johnson is due to give evidence to the Commons privileges committee from 2pm. The hearing is in the Grimond Room in Portcullis House, the relatively new annex on the parliamentary estate, opposite Big Ben. We are expecting Johnson to be accompanied by his legal team. There may be some MPs in the room too, and there are a few seats for journalists and members of the public.
These are from my colleague Aubrey Allegretti, who is in the queue.
There's already a hefty throng of people waiting outside the privileges committee room for a chance to witness what will be quite the showdown.
— Aubrey Allegretti (@breeallegretti) March 22, 2023
Boris Johnson will draw a lot of attention - away from potential difficulties for Rishi Sunak.
A couple of MPs waiting to watch Boris Johnson’s hearing - including Jacob Rees-Mogg and Chris Bryant https://t.co/jRhkfsKzHl
— Aubrey Allegretti (@breeallegretti) March 22, 2023
Updated
Rees-Mogg says he will vote against NI protocol deal even though Stormont brake 'could be useful'
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, told the World at One he would be voting against the government today even though he was in favour of the Stormont brake, which he said “could turn out to be useful”. He was voting against because “unfortunately” the government was treating this as a vote on the principle of the Northern Ireland protocol deal as a whole.
Echoing the argument used by Boris Johnson overnight (see 9.40am), Rees-Mogg said that Rishi Sunak’s deal “solidifies some of the problems with the [existing] protocol”. He said it would have been better for the government to proceed with the Northern Ireland protocol bill.
When it was put to him that Steve Baker, the Northern Ireland minister, said Johnson was at risk of becoming a “pound shop Nigel Farage” for taking this view (see 10.51am), Rees-Mogg said he took that as a compliment because Poundshop was “a very good, successful business, providing services that the British people need”.
Updated
Updated
Back in the Commons, Chris Heaton-Harris, the Northern Ireland secretary, is opening the debate on the Windsor framework, the deal to revise the Northern Ireland arrangements. The vote should come at 2.21pm.
Vote on Windsor Framework SI no later than 1421
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) March 22, 2023
Technically MPs will just be voting on one aspect of the deal, a statutory instrument relating to the Stormont brake, but the result will widely be interpreted as a verdict on the deal as a whole.
The Commons privileges committee will be taking evidence from Boris Johnson when the division takes place. When a select committee hearing gets interrupted by a vote, the normal procedure is for the chair to call a 15-minute adjournment to allow MPs to vote.
Updated
PMQs – snap verdict
Traditionally crime has been a Tory issue. But it is now one where Labour has a narrow lead over the Conservatives as the party that would handle it best, and what’s surprising is not that Keir Starmer raised it today, but that he does not do so more often. Particularly because of his record as a former DPP, it feels like easy territory for him.
What was new was Starmer’s decision to combine an attack on crime with the suggestion that Rishi Sunak is out of touch and Londoncentric, and that he should “get out of Westminster” more. This a line that we hear more usually when the Conservatives are deploying it against Starmer, and to his credit Sunak retaliated effectively, pointing out that his North Yorkshire constituency is a lot further from Westminster than Starmer’s north London one.
Tory MPs loved this, but in the wider public arena it is hard to see Sunak winning an “in touch, man of the people” contest with Starmer. He might have a house in Yorkshire, but he is not a northerner, does not sound like one, and many people now know that his family is richer than the king’s. Starmer does not easily win this contest either; his upbringing was a lot less privileged than Sunak’s, but because he is a knight and a barrister, a lot of people assume he is posh. But Starmer can at least neutralise this as a Tory attack line, and that is what he was doing today.
Sunak’s MPs also enjoyed his riposte about Sue Gray. It worked in the chamber, but this is the ultimate “inside the beltway” argument that does not resonate more widely.
To win the crime argument, the Tories normally rely on attacking Labour for voting against tougher sentences. In the past that might have worked. But with prosecution and conviction rates for some crimes now so low, this response does not carry much force any more and that showed when Sunak tried it today. As Starmer explained, if you want someone to serve a long jail sentence, you have to catch them first.
Updated
Joe Pike from Sky News says government sources predict as many as 40 Tory MPs might vote against the Northern Ireland protocol deal today.
Senior government source predicts Stormont Brake rebellion of between 20 and 40 Tory MPs (incl Johnson, Truss, IDS, Mogg, Patel).
— Joe Pike (@joepike) March 22, 2023
Major whipping operation underway to shift rebels into the abstention column.
No 10's aim at this stage seems to be securing a govt majority.
The government’s current working majority is 66, which means that any rebellion involving 34 or more Tory MPs voting against indicates that No 10 no longer has a functioning majority on this issue, and is reliant on the opposition.
Sunak says since 2010 there are 2 million fewer people living in poverty.
(He is probably referring to absolute poverty, a figure tied to the relative poverty threshold when the government came to power. Because of inflation, over time absolute poverty almost always falls.)
Updated
Sir Jeremy Wright (Con) asks about a constituent who went into a coma after a Covid injection. He says the family continue to believe in vaccines, but want compensation improved for the very tiny minority of people who have a reaction after one.
Sunak says cases like this are extremely rare. One-off payments are available, he says. That does not prevent people seeking compensation. Vaccine compensations schemes are being reformed, he says.
Jerome Mayhew (Con) says up to one million people living outside London will be affected by the extension of Ulez. That is unfair, he says.
Sunak says that is right. And he says the Labour government in Wales also wants to extend road pricing.
Graham Stringer (Lab) claims science was not followed during Covid, as the Telegraph’s lockdown files have revealed. (That is not what everyone concluded from their reports.) He calls for a short-term inquiry to address this.
Sunak says the Covid inquiry is already under way. It is independent, he says.
Updated
Bob Seely (Con) says the Isle of Wight, which he represents, is the only significant island in the UK without a fixed link (a bridge to the mainland) that does not get extra money to help fund services.
Sunak says he spent many happy family holidays on the island as a child. The island is getting an extra £1m to recognise its special circumstances, he says.
Updated
As my colleague Pippar Crerar points out, in his final answer to Keir Starmer, rattling off his government’s agenda, Rishi Sunak said he was halving inflation – on the day figures came out saying it is going up.
Rishi Sunak tells MPs his government is “halving inflation” on the day it went up from 10.1% to 10.4% #PMQs
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) March 22, 2023
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, starts with a tribute to PC Keith Palmer.
What worries the PM most about Brexit, the 4% hit to UK productivity, or three former Tory leaders voting against him this afternoon?
Theresa May leaps to her feet at #PMQs to protest when SNP’s Stephen Flynn says that three former Tory leaders are planning to vote against the Stormont brake. Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and…. Iain Duncan Smith.
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) March 22, 2023
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, says it is two.
(Hoyle seems to be thinking of former Tory PMs. Theresa May is not voting against, but Iain Duncan Smith reportedly is.)
Sunak says the SNP is in a mess.
Flynn says people are facing the biggest fall in living standards since the war.
Sunak says the government is helping people with energy bills.
Updated
Starmer says the only criminal investigation Sunak has been involved in is the one that found him guilty of breaking the law. He says he was a prosecutor. He prosecuted countless rapists, and he supports tough sentences, but you have to catch them first. After 13 years of Tory government, they have done nothing on standards, community policing has been weakened, and burglars and rapists walk the street with impunity.
Sunak says he has apologised for the fine. But he says the Sue Gray report confirmed that he had no knowledge of the meeting. But Sunak says he does not need to tell Starmer that; Starmer has probably spoken to Gray more than he has.
Sunak says he is getting on with his agenda.
Updated
Starmer says Sunak is out of touch. He needs “to get out of Westminster, get out of Kensington – and I don’t mean to Malibu” and see what reaction he gets. The Tories should be ashamed of their record, he says. In the BBC case he mentioned, a cul-de-sac has seen 10 burglaries in 18 months, but only one resulted in a charge.
Sunak says north Yorkshire is a lot further away than north London.
That goes down well with Tory MPs.
He claims crime has gone down since the Tories came into power. Labour has just voted against tougher sentences for criminals. It is the same old Labour, “soft on crime, soft on criminals”.
Updated
Starmer says people are fed up with a government that never takes responsiblity. Crime is out of control and people are paying the price. He quotes a case highlighted by the BBC where no one was charged for attacking a woman with a baseball bat. What is the charge rate for theft and burglary?
Sunak says neighbourhood crime is down by 29% since 2019. The government is on target to double the number of rape cases reaching court.
And he says the government has changed the law to ensure rapists spend more time in prison. But the shadow policing minister said prison does not prevent crime.
Starmer says what Sunak refers to is not mandatory. How can it be right to have different standards for difference forces? He accuses the government of negligence. Rape charges are at 1.6%. There should be proper rape units in every force, as Labour recommends, he says. Why won’t the government back that?
Sunak says Louise Casey also says primary responsibility for the Met rests with the mayor of London. Casey said that relationship was dysfunctional. The mayor should play his part. Sunak says the government has published a rape review action plan. Evidence collecting has improved, and funding for victim services have quadrupled.
Updated
Starmer says he will take it from that that Sunak does accept the report in full. Will the government back Labour’s plans for proper national vetting?
Sunak says the government is already taking action to back the proposals in the Casey report. He met Casey two months ago. He says the national code for vetting is being updated. Within weeks, HM’s inspectorate will report back on the vetting procedures of all forces.
Keir Starmer says today is the sixth anniversary of the Westminster terrorist attack, and the death of PC Keith Palmer, killed defending the Commons. He says brave police officers in the Met are being let down. He says he accepts Louise Casey’s recommendations in full. Does the PM?
Sunak says he was “appalled” to read the report. The government is taking steps to ensure culture, standards and behaviour improve. The Met must work hard to regain people’s trust.
Updated
Jo Gideon (Con) asks Sunak to thank Stoke council for supporting her call for a postbox to heaven in a local cemetery, before the national day of reflection. And will he back her call for action to promote button battery safety?
Sunak says the government is aware of the danger posed by button batteries.
Updated
Rishi Sunak starts with the usual spiel about having meetings this morning with colleagues, and futher meetings later.
The nationalist SDLP party, which has two MPs in parliament, will vote in favour of the Northern Ireland protocol deal. Yesterday Colum Eastwood, its leader, said it might abstain because of concerns about the Stormont brake. Today he said:
We continue to have serious concerns about the operation of the Stormont brake and we will be vigilant about its implementation, including the clear limits on the operation of a veto over amended internal market law.
But overall the Windsor framework provides a clear path back to devolved government in Northern Ireland. With cuts to our schools and youth services, hospital waiting lists out of control, GP surgeries closing across the north and public sector workers desperately in need of a pay rise, there are more important priorities that we must address.
Updated
Rishi Sunak will be taking PMQs shortly.
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
Updated
ERG says it is advising its members to vote against Sunak's NI protocol deal
The European Research Group, the caucus which represents hardline Tory Brexiters, has said it is advising its members to vote against Rishi Sunak’s Northern Ireland protocol deal today, Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt reports.
Mark Francois: senior officers of the European Research Group recommended that we should vote against the statutory instrument on the Stormont Brake
— Nicholas Watt (@nicholaswatt) March 22, 2023
Mark Francois: the fact that Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Iain Duncan Smith - three former party leaders - have come against this has boosted numbers
— Nicholas Watt (@nicholaswatt) March 22, 2023
Asked whether any ministers will resign over this, Mark Francois says: that is a matter for them
— Nicholas Watt (@nicholaswatt) March 22, 2023
Mark Francois: the Stormont brake is a brake with no brake pads. The government completely oversold it
— Nicholas Watt (@nicholaswatt) March 22, 2023
The ERG does not publish a list of its members, and does not say how many there are, but several dozen Tories are closely associated with it.
Jack Doyle, who was Boris Johnson’s communications chief when the partygate story broke, denied ever telling the then-prime minister that Covid-19 guidance was followed at all times in No 10, the evidence bundle released today reveals.
As PA Media reports, in his evidence to the committee, Doyle was asked whether he assured the then-prime minister that Covid-19 rules were followed at all times. He replied:
As per my evidence to the Sue Gray report, in relation to the events I attended I said I believed no rules were broken.
Asked whether he told Johnson “Covid guidance” was followed at all times, Doyle said: “No.”
Asked whether he told Johnson that “no parties were held in No 10” while restrictions were in force, Doyle said:
I advised the prime minister that I did not consider the event of December 18, 2020 to be a party.
Doyle highlighted the distinction between the rules that were in force and the guidelines but No 10 “is an old building with limited space” and although efforts were made to follow the guidelines on social distancing “it would not be possible for me to say” they were complied with at all times.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons speaker, has written to all MPs telling them not to say anything that could be seen as interference with the work of the privileges committee, Dan Bloom from Politico reports. This follows attacks on the committee from some of Boris Johnson’s supporters. Hoyle says interference in this manner could be seen as a contempt of parliament.
Lindsay Hoyle has written to MPs on Boris Johnson… pic.twitter.com/G50KrifzlC
— Dan Bloom (@danbloom1) March 22, 2023
The evidence bundle released by the privileges committee today also shows that one No 10 official warned Martin Reynolds that his “BYOB” party plan (see 11.13am) was a “bad idea”. The official said:
I saw the invite and I expressed my concern to Martin that I thought this was a bad idea. I declined the invitation.
I heard that there were so many people who were unhappy about the party that they were not going to go.
As Boris Johnson’s principal private secretary, Martin Reynolds organised the drinks event for staff in the Downing Street garden on 20 May 2020. This was the first of the Partygate events investigated by the police and Sue Gray, and it earned Reynlds the nickname “party Marty”.
Reynolds sent an email to staff telling them it was a “BYOB” (bring your own booze” event. In evidence published today, he says he regrets this. He says:
With the benefit of hindsight, the language used was totally inappropriate and gave a misleading impression of the nature of the event.
It was an event held because staff needed a morale boost after an extremely difficult period when all sorts of tensions had begun to surface and I hoped that being thanked by the PM and talking to each other might strengthen their sense of being part of one team.
The event was not a party in any normal sense of the word.
Back to the Northern Ireland protocol deal vote, and David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, has mocked Liz Truss’s decision to vote against the Windsor framework.
Liz Truss voting against the Windsor Framework?
— David Davis (@DavidDavisMP) March 22, 2023
She voted FOR Theresa May's deal, at Chequers, which is what created the problem that Rishi Sunak is now solving.
According to Tom Larkin at Sky, who is keeping a tally, at least 10 Tories will vote against the government today.
Hold onto your hats. It's a spreadsheet day 🚨🧮
— Tom Larkin (@TomLarkinSky) March 22, 2023
Brexit rebellion growing with some BIG names saying they'll vote against Rishi Sunak's deal, inc 2 former PMs.
12 MPs have confirmed they won't vote for the deal today (by my count) - how many more join this group? pic.twitter.com/bdBXFjHE75
Drinking wine in garden during work meeting within Covid rules, Johnson told Sue Gray
Boris Johnson told the Sue Gray inquiry that he did not see it as being against Covid rules to work in the No 10 garden while having a bottle of wine, the evidence released by the privileges committee today reveals. Johnson said:
I would encourage people into the garden for the pandemic.
I felt it would be wrong to stop people going into the garden.
It is democratic and conducive to staff wellbeing – where to go to draw the line?
When you are in the garden and in a meeting it was OK to have a bottle of wine accompanied by alcohol in moderation.
Certainly not against the rules as I understand them.
Updated
Steve Baker says Johnson risks being seen as 'pound shop Nigel Farage because of stance on Northern Ireland protocol
Turning back to the Northern Ireland protocol deal vote for a moment, Steve Baker, the Northern Ireland minister, has said that Boris Johnson risks being remembered as a “pound shop Nigel Farage” for his stance on the Windsor framework.
Baker said that reviving the Northern Ireland protocol bill, Johnson’s declared alternative to Rishi Sunak’s deal (see 9.40am), would “wreck our relations with the European Union and damage our standing internationally”. Sky’s Sam Coates has posted the full quote on Twitter.
In a pool interview, Steve Baker asks whether Boris Johnson wants to be remembered as “pound shop Nigel Farage” for opposing the Windsor Framework 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/7XPgsqxFre
— Sam Coates Sky (@SamCoatesSky) March 22, 2023
Liz Truss has not publicly called for the Northern Ireland protocol bill to be revived. But, in a briefing to journalists this morning, a source familiar with her thinking said that “as the instigator of the Northern Ireland protocol bill” (she introduced it as foreign secretary) she felt that Sunak’s deal did not satisfactorily resolve the problems thrown up by the protocol.
Johnson 'often' joined Friday night drinks in press office and could have 'shut them down' if he wanted, MPs told
In its report earlier this month the privileges committee said there was evidence that Boris Johnson sometimes used to join the regular Friday night drinks events in the No 10 press office. The report said that information came from evidence submitted to the committee, but it did not supply the quote.
Now we’ve got it. It is attributed to a No 10 official, who said that Johnson could have stopped these gathering if he wanted to. The official said:
The former prime minister often saw and joined these gatherings, either he was invited by Spads [special advisers] or spotted them whilst walking up to his flat.
The route he took down the corridor looks straight into the press room and vestibule so it’s impossible not to see.
He had the opportunity to shut them down but joined in, made speeches, had a drink with staff.
He could have taken the issue up with Martin Reynolds, his principal private secretary, to shut them down.
He could see what was happening and allowed the culture to continue.
In his statement yesterday Johnson said that he could not properly respond to the evidence that he sometimes joined Friday night drinks in the press office because the committee had not set out the allegation in detail. He said:
The fourth report contains an opaque reference to Friday night “press pffice gatherings” which I am said to have “occasionally joined” (at §21). No further detail is provided, and no such specific events are identified by the committee. Insofar as any allegation is made by the committee, it is incumbent on the committee to make it so that I can respond to it. That is particularly so if the committee are referring to an event that has never previously been identified or investigated by Sue Gray or the Metropolitan police.
Johnson ignored advice from senior official not to tell MPs all Covid guidance was followed, evidence shows
In his evidence yesterday Boris Johnson revealed that his principal private secretary, advised him to take out a reference to all the Covid guidance being followed in No 10 from a script he was going to use at PMQs on 8 December 2021.
Johnson’s evidence repeatedly stressed the difference between rules and guidance. He did tells MPs that both the rules and the guidance were followed, but the document he published yesterday implied he accepts that the claim about the guidance being followed all the time was more questionable.
Today the privileges committee has published the full quote from Reynolds in its bundle.
Reynolds has the wrong date; this PMQs was on the 8 December.
At PMQs Johnson ignored the advice saying he should take out the reference to guidance and told MPs: “The guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”
Cabinet secretary Simon Case says he never told Johnson all Covid rules and guidance were followed in No 10
The new evidence also shows that Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, says that he never told Boris Johnson that Covid rules and guidance were followed at all time in Downing Street, and that he never assured him no parties were held.
Case also said he was not aware of anyone else giving Johnson these assurances.
He gave these answers in evidence to the committee.
As cabinet secretary, Case is the most senior civil servant in No 10. But he is not necessarily the person who briefs the PM most regularly, or whom Johnson would have relied on most for a briefing before PMQs.
'I don't know what we say about the flat' - new Partygate evidence raises fresh questions for Johnson
The bundle of evidence published by the privileges committee this morning is full of interesting material. Here is a passage showing an exchange between Jack Doyle, the director of communications at the time, and an official when they were discussing how to respond to the first media inquiry, from Pippa Crerar (then at the Mirror, now the Guardian’s political editor) about Partygate.
“I don’t know what we say about the flat,” Doyle said.
That is a reference to the so-called Abba party in the Downing Street flat, which involved Abba music being played so loud that it could be heard in the No 10 press office several floors below. Carrie Johnson, Boris’s wife, was reportedly celebrating the departure of Dominic Cummings with friends.
Sue Gray did not properly investigate this for her report, and Johnson himself only made one oblique reference to it in his evidence yesterday.
Johnson urges Sunak to revive confrontational approach to EU as he confirms he will vote against protocol deal
We knew that Boris Johnson would not be voting for Rishi Sunak’s Northern Ireland protocol deal. He said so in a speech earlier this month. But to vote against, as he has said he will do today, makes his rebellion much more serious.
What is even more provocative is the reason he has given for voting against. In a statement given overnight to Daily Telegraph, he said:
The proposed arrangements would mean either that Northern Ireland remained captured by the EU legal order – and was increasingly divergent from the rest of the UK – or they would mean that the whole of the UK was unable properly to diverge and take advantage of Brexit.
That is not acceptable. I will be voting against the proposed arrangements today. Instead, the best course of action is to proceed with the Northern Ireland protocol bill, and make sure that we take back control.
The Northern Ireland protocol bill is the legislation that would allow the UK government to ignore parts of the protocol unilaterally. Many lawyers argued that it was illegal under international law, because it would involve the UK breaking a treaty it has signed.
Johnson introduced the bill when he was prime minister, and he has argued that the threat of British unilateral action made the EU more inclined to negotiate. Sunak has now abandoned the bill.
But proposing bringing it back, Johnson is not just arguing for tweaks to the deal that has been negotiated. He is in effect saying that it should be ripped up, and that Britain should revive the threat to just ignore the treaty with the EU that it agreed in 2019 (when he himself was PM).
This goes much further than what most other Tory or DUP critics of the deal have said, and, if it were ever implemented, would ignite diplomatic war with Brussels.
Commons privileges committee publishes evidence bundle ahead of Johnson's evidence session
The Commons privileges committee has now published a bundle of evidence that Boris Johnson and the MPs questioning him may refer to during today’s session. It runs to 110 pages and it’s here.
In a statement the committee says:
The documents comprise the evidence and materials that will be referred to in the course of oral questioning by MPs. Much of the material has already been previously published, including in the committee’s fourth report.
All evidence has already been shared with the witness two weeks ago, in unredacted form. The documents published this morning are materials that the committee and Mr Johnson have selected, that will be referred to in the course of the oral evidence session later today. The committee is now publishing these materials for the benefit of those following the oral evidence session so that they’re able to follow proceedings accordingly.
Liz Truss to vote against Sunak's Northern Ireland protocol deal
Liz Truss will join Boris Johnson in voting against Rishi Sunak’s Northern Ireland protocol deal today, PA Media is reporting, quoting a source close to Truss.
Truss is understood to believe the Windsor framework deal does not “satisfactorily resolve the issues thrown up by” the Northern Ireland protocol and “almost fatally impinges” on the UK’s ability to diverge from EU rules and regulations.
Boris Johnson says he will vote against Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal as he prepares to face Partygate inquiry
Good morning. Does it matter if ministers don’t tell the truth to parliament? In theory the answer is yes, and ever since John Profumo lied to MPs about his relationship with Christine Keeler, Erskine May, the parliamentary rulebook, has been explicit about misleading the Commons being a potential contempt of parliament. But has parliament got the will and the means to enforce this? That is what today’s privileges committee hearing with Boris Johnson is really all about.
For more background, you can read all our Partygate coverage here, and my colleague Archie Bland has a good one-stop summary of what to expect here.
Some reports say the Johnson hearing could last for up to five hours, and we’ve also got PMQs. But that’s not all. The God of News is particularly bountiful today, and we have also got a vote on Rishi Sunak’s Northern Ireland protocol deal, with confirmation overnight that Johnson (him again) will be voting against. My colleague Aletha Adu has the details.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: The Commons privileges committee publishes a bundle of evidence relevant to its inquiry into Johnson.
12pm: Rishi Sunak faces Keir Starmer at PMQs.
After 12.45pm: MP begin the debate on regulations implementing the Stormont brake part of the Windsor framework, the revised version of the Northern Ireland protocol. The vote will come 90 minutes after the debate starts.
2pm: Johnson starts giving evidence to the privileges committee
I’ll try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Alternatively, you can email me at andrew.sparrow@theguardian.com.
Updated
