Good morning. If, at 2pm today, you find that the high-octane antiquing of ITV1’s Dickinson’s Real Deal isn’t quite hitting the spot, you will find the rolling news channels offering a rare bit of competitive counter-programming with a preposterous old smoothie of their own. At around that time, the House of Commons’ privileges committee will begin one of its most significant hearings in recent memory. The witness, who will face questions for up to four hours, is Boris Johnson, and what his fellow MPs make of his evidence could decide his parliamentary future.
What parliamentary future, you may ask? After all, Johnson has already earned nearly £5m in speaking fees and book advances since resigning as prime minister; his side hustle as MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip hardly seems worth the bother. But Johnson has shown no sign of being philosophical about the reputational harm of allegations that he knowingly misled the Commons over Partygate. And rumours of his interest in usurping Rishi Sunak to become Conservative leader have proven far more persistent than anyone would have expected when he stood down in something he denied was disgrace last summer.
For all that we already know about the evidence and stakes informing this afternoon’s session, Johnson’s own evidence forms the last – and, he argues, most important – piece of the puzzle. Today’s newsletter runs you through what’s at stake. Here are the headlines.
Five big stories
Brexit | Rishi Sunak is set to push his revamped Northern Ireland protocol through the Commons despite hardline Conservative Brexiters rejecting the plan. The verdict of the European Research Group – which follows a similar decision by the Democratic Unionist party – is likely to mean a rebellion over the plan in a vote on Wednesday, although it appears unlikely to be significant.
Policing | Sadiq Khan has clashed with the commissioner of the Metropolitan police, saying he disagrees with Sir Mark Rowley’s refusal to describe his force as institutionally misogynistic, racist and homophobic. Khan told the Guardian that despite the disagreement, he backed Rowley to enact the reforms recommended by Louise Casey’s bombshell report.
Pensions | Ministers have reportedly delayed plans to bring forward a rise in the state pension age, amid falling life expectancy in the UK. The Financial Times has reported ministers have decided to delay making a decision until after the next general election because of fears about a revolt by middle-aged voters.
LGBTQ+ rights | MPs in Uganda have passed a controversial anti-LGBTQ+ bill, which would make homosexual acts punishable by death. All but two of the 389 legislators voted for the bill which introduces capital and life imprisonment sentences for gay sex and “recruitment, promotion and funding” of same-sex “activities”.
Technology | Google has launched its own chatbot, Bard, that it hopes will compete with ChatGPT. Users can now sign up for access via a waiting list, in a pivotal moment for the tech giant as its web search service risks being outcompeted by AI chatbots.
In depth: What’s at stake for the former prime minister – and how he’ll defend himself
Earlier this month, the Commons privileges committee published an interim report on their investigation into whether Boris Johnson misled parliament over lockdown parties in Downing Street. That document did not make cheerful reading for the former prime minister, noting that the committee had seen “evidence that the House of Commons may have been misled”. Unsurprisingly, Johnson’s fightback was rapid, well-organised, and aggressive.
Today, he will take an oath to tell the truth – but recollections of events last winter vary considerably. Here’s a reminder of why the hearing is taking place, and what we know about the evidence.
***
What is the committee investigating?
While many might want the inquiry to reach a general view of Boris Johnson’s conduct over Partygate, the committee’s remit is much more specific. They were tasked by the House of Commons with assessing whether Boris Johnson deliberately misled parliament. They say they are considering whether he ever made “reckless or intentional” misleading statements over lockdown gatherings in Downing Street. If he did, he would be guilty of contempt of parliament.
To reach a view on those charges, they are looking at the truth of what he said, what he would have known at the time, and whether his statements were quickly and thoroughly corrected if they were wrong.
It has already been established beyond dispute that Johnson made inaccurate statements over the gatherings. So the most important remaining question is whether, when Johnson made statements which turned out to be untrue, there is evidence that he knew they were false – or was reckless in his disregard for the truth. In plain English, as Johnson said himself in a submission published yesterday, “this amounts to an allegation that I deliberately lied to Parliament.”
***
What is the case against Johnson?
The committee has zeroed in on Johnson’s responses at prime minister’s questions in late 2021 and early 2022, where he said, for example, that “the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times”, and said MPs would have to wait for Sue Gray’s inquiry to conclude for answers.
Its interim report, published earlier this month, sets up a difficult session today for the former prime minister. It says that the evidence already seen suggests that “the House of Commons may have been misled” and that “it appears that Mr Johnson did not correct the statements that he repeatedly made”. It also says that the evidence “strongly suggests that breaches of guidance would have been obvious to Mr Johnson at the time he was at the gatherings”.
Aubrey Allegretti has a list of ten questions the committee could put to him today. The narrative which MPs want to test goes like this: there is evidence – including photographs – that as well as being aware of gatherings at which he was not present, Johnson attended others himself. There is also evidence, via his repeated explanation at press conferences of lockdown rules and guidance, that he understood the government’s policy.
Finally, it says that a witness told the committee that at a 27 November 2020 gathering, Johnson had reflected that “this is probably the most unsocially distanced gathering in the UK right now”. It also notes messages it has seen from No 10 advisers – including one from January 2022 where Downing Street director of communications Jack Doyle said that he was “struggling to come up with a way [a gathering on 19 June 2020] is in the rules in my head” – which it says suggest that it would have been clear to Johnson that the events broke the rules.
One of the most difficult points for Johnson: he was told by senior civil servant Sir Martin Reynolds that it was not “realistic” to say that “all guidance had been followed at all times”, and deleted the line from a statement at prime minister’s questions. But less than half an hour later, he said: “The guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”
***
How is he defending himself?
Johnson does not dispute that the gatherings happened, or that his statements to parliament turned out to be wrong. His argument is that he genuinely thought they were true when he made them.
When the interim report came out, Johnson claimed that it “totally vindicates me”, a view that may have come as a surprise to its authors. Now, with the help of a six-strong legal team led by Lord Pannick KC (pictured above), he has submitted an 18,000-word dossier setting out his defence, which was published on Tuesday (pdf). Here’s a summary of its key arguments.
According to Johnson, the evidence published so far has been “cherry-picked” to make a case against him. He will point to internal messages which he says show that his statements were informed by “lines to take” provided by aides. MPs are likely to ask whether his recollections were really so hazy that he trusted a “line to take” above his own knowledge.
Johnson’s dossier also claims that evidence seen by the committee from Downing Street staffers suggests that others present thought the gatherings were legitimate, meaning it was reasonable for him to take the same view. He claims that there is no “smoking gun” indicating that he lied. He argues that he believed leaving drinks for staffers were essential for morale.
Besides the specifics of the evidence, Johnson is also attacking the basis of the investigation. He claims the committee is “highly partisan”, and suggests that the inquiry has been unfair to him because it has “gone significantly beyond its terms of reference” by examining his statements about No 10 adherence to guidance about social distancing – which was not legally binding – as well as rules, which were. (That might be motivated in part by his difficulty in accounting for having been told by Reynolds that it would be “unrealistic” to say guidance was followed and accepting his advice, only to do so anyway.)
His allies have also claimed that the fact that Sue Gray has now taken a job with Labour means that her report should not be trusted, and suggest that this undermines the committee’s investigation. They also say that committee chair Harriet Harman has a predetermined view of Johnson’s guilt because of tweets she sent before the inquiry began. And Johnson has attacked the evidence of Dominic Cummings, who he says “bears an animus” against him.
It is not clear whether this tactic will persuade MPs on the committee, the majority of whom are Conservatives. (Read more about them here.) But even if it doesn’t, Johnson will hope that it will undermine any conclusions against him.
***
What are the possible consequences?
No verdict is expected until May. When the committee does produce its final report, Johnson will have two weeks to review it and respond.
If the committee finds him guilty of contempt, it can recommend sanctions including his suspension from the House of Commons. (Here’s a full explainer on the options available.) Whatever the committee recommends, no sanction will be applied without the support of a majority of MPs. Tories have a free vote, and it is likely that enough will back the committee’s verdict to mean that when combined with opposition MPs they have a majority.
If so, a suspension of more than 10 days would trigger a recall petition in his constituency, and if that is successful, Johnson could face a byelection. That might, finally, be the end of the Partygate saga.
What else we’ve been reading
On 11 May 2022, Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh (above) was killed as she reported on a raid that was happening in the north-west city of Jenin. Some 60 miles away on that same day, 16-year-old Thaer Yazouri was shot. In this multimedia report, Kaamil Ahmed, Lydia McMullan, Elena Morresi, Garry Blight and Harry Fischer break down their last day in meticulous detail. Nimo
Marina Hyde on Boris Johnson: “[His] date-with-destiny exposes the tragically serious reality that the clown act seeks to keep hidden – he is still in pursuit of the only job in which he has ever made sense to himself”. Archie
According to a number of studies, straight men tend to have more orgasms than straight women. Discourse around the orgasm gap can be obstructive though – Zoe Williams examines why this framing can be quite reductive. Nimo
This fascinating long read by William Ralston has unprecedented access to the world of Premier League referees, who speak with remarkable candour about the difficulties of their job. Worth reading so that next time you shout at the wanker in the black, at least you’ll have a sliver of sympathy. Archie
Ugly-cool, dad-chic, normcore – whatever you want to call it, the trend of dressing for comfort may have saved the feet of millions of people. In this Atlantic (£) piece Amanda Mull takes a look at how orthopaedic shoes became a fashion staple. Nimo
Sport
Women’s Champions League | Arsenal fell to a first-leg quarter-final defeat against Bayern Munich thanks to Lea Schüller’s 39th-minute goal (above). Jonathan Liew writes that Arsenal are “down, but not out” after “a performance of real energy and purpose that has set up a beautifully poised second leg at the Emirates Stadium next week.”
Football | Even Roy Hodgson, who has returned as manager of Crystal Palace until the end of the season at the age of 75, may have been surprised to get the call from chairman Steve Parish, Ed Aarons writes. One source tells him: “Steve has this thing where he cannot let go of people who have helped in the past. He will always be grateful for what Roy did first time around.”
Baseball | Japan edged defending champions Team USA 3-2 to win their first World Baseball Classic title since 2009 in Miami. Star pitcher Shohei Ohtani closed the game by striking out his Los Angeles Angels teammate Mike Trout in the ninth inning. “I just wish it would have went different,” Trout said. “But the baseball world won tonight.”
The front pages
The former prime minister’s appearance before the privileges committee leads a number of front pages on Wednesday. The Guardian says, “Johnson faces fight for political survival at Partygate hearing”. The i calls it “D-day for Johnson: ex-PM drags Sunak into inquiry as he fights to save his political career.” The Mail has “Bullish Boris up for the fight”, while the Mirror mocks up a list of “Boris’ partygate excuses”.
The FT leads with “Falling life expectancy triggers delay to raising of state pension age to 68”. The Times reports on a new study that finds “Pill and coil shown to raise breast cancer risk”. The Telegraph says “‘Hypocrite’ Starmer to avoid tax on pension”. The Sun leads on an interview with Ed Sheeran, under the headline: “I’ll never do drugs again after pal died”.
Today in Focus
Britain’s biggest police force is ‘racist, sexist, and homophobic’ – can it change?
A landmark report into the Metropolitan police says discrimination is ‘baked in’ and trust in the force has plummeted. Is it worth trying to fix?
Cartoon of the day | Ben Jennings
The Upside
A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad
Tucson, Arizona is one of the hottest cities in the US, and many lower income areas in the city have become even hotter because of a lack of shade. Dunbar Spring is one such area, but residents have spent the last two decades trying to combat the heat by creating an urban food forest. The unpaved streets are lined with native trees and shrubs that are fed by rainwater diverted from the city – in just one block you can find native goji berries, desert ironwood with edamame-like seeds and chuparosa bushes with cucumber-flavoured flowers.
Crucially, the tree canopy provides natural shade for those who live in the area to help them cope with the increasingly brutal summers, as Tucson is the third fastest warming city in the US. The urban farm has become a model for other areas that are also dealing with extreme heat and food insecurity caused by the climate crisis.
Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday
Bored at work?
And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.
