Boris Johnson will face an investigation into whether he misled Parliament over Downing Street parties during lockdown. MPs voted to refer him to the Privileges Committee this afternoon.
The committee will look into his conduct and could find him in contempt of Parliament. Earlier, the Conservative withdrew a bid to delay the decision.
A motion from Labour was eventually passed without a formal vote after Tory whips decided not to oppose it formally. The 'on the nod' vote means there is no list of how each MP voted.
The committee will investigate four times the PM allegedly lied by denying knowledge of lockdown parties. It could ask Whitehall enforcer Sue Gray for the 300 pictures and 500 documents she obtained in her Partygate investigation, although she could turn the request down, reports the Mirror.
If found guilty of contempt, the PM could be suspended from the Commons. However, the saga is set to drag out for months yet, as the investigation will not even start until the Met Police finish issuing Partygate fines.
During the day, senior Tory Steve Baker added his name to the growing list of backbenchers calling for the PM to quit. Mr Baker, an experienced operator who played a key role in bringing down Theresa May, told Mr Johnson: "The gig's up".
Sturdy defender of the PM Michael Ellis, the Cabinet Office minister, claimed Mr Johnson had "apologised repeatedly for what happened - he is mortified by it!"
But the Prime Minister was forced to bat away questions about Partygate on his India trip as "not very useful" as it overshadowed his visit - despite apologising repeatedly for the breach earlier this week.
"Why don't you get onto the substance of the trip?" he snapped at Sky News Political Editor Beth Rigby, while shaking his head and checking his watch. The PM said he had "absolutely nothing to hide" over the Covid law-breaking at the heart of Government.
Earlier, Mr Johnson said he was "very keen" for the Commons Privileges Committee probe to go ahead, forcing his whips back home into a shambolic U-turn. After his remarks, Tory MPs were told they would get a free vote on the Labour motion to refer the PM.
In a powerful address opening the debate, Labour leader Keir Starmer vowed to uphold Parliamentary conventions because they “protect Britain from malaise, from extremism, from decline”.
He added: “This is important because the case against the PM is that he has abused those tools… and used them to protect himself rather than our democracy”.
Labour’s leader said the principle of telling the truth was “under attack”, telling Parliament: “The Prime Minister has been accused of repeatedly, deliberately and routinely misleading this House over parties held in Downing Street during lockdown."
Tory rebel William Wragg, who has already called for the PM to go, said he planned to back the Labour motion as he criticised the PM for hiding behind the Ukraine conflict.
“The invasion of a sovereign nation by a dictatorial aggressor should not be a reason why we should accept lower standards ourselves," he said.
Mr Wragg said that many Tory MPs are “struggling” with Partygate in the face of fury from their constituents.
“We bear the scars of misjudgements of leadership," he blasted. "There can be few colleagues who are truly enjoying being MPs at the moment. It is utterly depressing to be asked to defend the indefensible”.
He added: "Each time, a part of us withers".
Tory Steve Baker added: "I've been tempted to forgive. But I have to say now the possibility of that really has gone. I'm sorry but for not obeying the letter and the spirit, the prime minister must be long gone... The Prime Minister should know the gig's up".
At the start of the debate Keir Starmer withdrew a claim he made yesterday about Boris Johnson attacking the BBC over Ukraine at the start of the debate, after the government said it was not true.
By contrast, the Prime Minister has insisted he did not deliberately mislead MPs when he said "all guidance was followed" in 10 Downing Street.
Why is Boris Johnson accused of lying to Parliament?
He repeatedly denied knowledge of parties in No10 and Whitehall - before it emerged he attended half of dozen of those probed by police. After it emerged he was at parties, he pivoted and said he didn't think they were parties.
The crucial question is whether he deliberately misled Parliament - i.e., he knew what he was saying was wrong, when he said it. The PM has insisted he was just reflecting his understanding at the time.
What is the Privileges Committee?
It is the body in charge of deciding whether MPs have committed a contempt of Parliament. It is led by Labour MP Chris Bryant, who is elected by his fellow MPs, but four of the seven members are Tories and he has recused himself from taking part.
The committee considers matters of privilege that are referred to it by the House of Commons after a vote by MPs. It then produces a report, which in this case would take several months.
People can be found in contempt for “deliberately misleading” the Commons - the most famous example being War Secretary John Profumo, who misled MPs by denying an affair in 1963. But it’s extremely rare - and MPs who admit “inadvertently” misleading the Commons normally avoid a ruling of contempt.
The last MP to face direct sanction from the committee was Tory Justin Tomlinson in 2016. He did not mislead Parliament - but instead leaked a credit crackdown report to Wonga.
In recent years the committee has also rapped Dominic Cummings for refusing to give evidence, and ruled that News International bosses misled Parliament during a hearing on phone hacking.
How will the investigation work?
The committee will begin an investigation into Boris Johnson’s conduct - but not yet. It will hold back any “substantive consideration of the matter” until Scotland Yard finishes its Partygate probe.
Once police finish dishing out fines, the probe would “consider whether the PM’s conduct amounted to a contempt of the House”. Parliament’s rulebook Erskine May says the Commons can decide MPs who “deliberately mislead” them are in contempt.
But there is no single definition of contempt and the House of Commons has the final say on whether one is committed.
