[ad_1]
Johnson resigned last week as a member of Parliament after receiving draft excerpts from a parliamentary report on whether he had misled fellow lawmakers over breaches in coronavirus rules. The long-awaited report, released Thursday, found that he had — multiple times. It also found that Johnson had been “deliberately disingenuous,” had acted in “contempt” of Parliament and had undermined the body’s “democratic process.” Johnson accused the committee of political bias, insisting he could not have misled anyone because he believed he was following the rules all along.
Here’s what to know about the blistering 30,000-word report.
Why was Johnson being investigated by Parliament?
In April 2022, British lawmakers decided that Parliament’s Privileges Committee should investigate whether the prime minister had misled lawmakers about holding gatherings at 10 Downing Street during the coronavirus pandemic, while the rest of the country was prohibited from mixing with other households.
The committee, composed of four Conservative lawmakers, two Labour lawmakers and one Scottish National Party lawmaker, was tasked with establishing three things: Did Johnson mislead Parliament? If so, did it constitute “contempt of Parliament?” And finally, how contemptuous was his behavior?
It was one of three official investigations into the swirl of accusations that Johnson and top aides had breached their own coronavirus rules. Media reports began as a trickle but eventually became a flood, including photographic and video evidence appearing to show the gatherings at No. 10. The scandal became known as “Partygate.”
Last year, a police investigation concluded that Johnson had breached the rules in Downing Street’s Cabinet Room on June 19, 2020, and issued him a 100-pound ($125) fine for breaking rules that prohibited gatherings of “two people or more indoors.” Police declined to fine Johnson for attending any of the five other Downing Street gatherings to which he had been linked.
A separate, broader investigation by senior civil servant Sue Gray identified 16 workplace gatherings in and around Downing Street when coronavirus restrictions were in place, concluding that some of them “should not have been allowed to take place.” She blamed the top leadership in Johnson’s government for a string of lockdown-breaking parties, including some marked by “excessive consumption of alcohol.”
Did Johnson mislead Parliament about the lockdown gatherings?
Yes — on at least five occasions, according to Thursday’s report.
The investigation concluded that Johnson was fully aware of the coronavirus guidance, had knowledge that it was breached at Downing Street and yet assured the House of Commons that the rules were being followed at all times.
The report said Johnson deliberately misled lawmakers on four occasions in 2021 and 2022 by telling them the Downing Street gatherings followed the rules. It also accused him of misleading the committee itself.
“He misled the House on an issue of the greatest importance to the House and to the public, and did so repeatedly,” it said.
“Someone who is repeatedly reckless and continues to deny that which is patent is a person whose conduct is sufficient to demonstrate intent,” it added.
As a result, it concluded that Johnson had treated Parliament with “serious contempt.” There is no precedent for this in the history of the British Parliament, the report said.
Misleading Parliament is considered a serious, potentially career-ending transgression in British politics, one that can lead to suspension or expulsion from Westminster.
What is contempt of Parliament?
Contempt of Parliament refers to any behavior considered by lawmakers to interfere or prevent them from getting on with their duties as democratic representatives.
It is loosely defined, but according to the Institute for Government think tank, it includes criminal acts, financial misconduct, leaking private proceedings and misleading the House.
Parliament has the power to punish those who breach its rules: In 1880, Parliament imprisoned an atheist lawmaker in Big Ben after he refused to swear an Oath of Allegiance to the Crown. But these powers have weakened over the years, and Parliament’s authority to lock anyone up has since lapsed, according to the institute.
What sanctions did the Privileges Committee recommend?
The committee is not able to issue sanctions, but can propose them for Parliament to vote on and implement.
On Thursday, it requested that Johnson be stripped of his member’s pass, a perk granted to former lawmakers that allows them to continue accessing the parliamentary estate in London’s Westminster.
Given that Johnson resigned from Parliament days before the committee made its report public, there are few other sanctions available. The committee said that if he hadn’t resigned, it would have proposed that he be suspended as a lawmaker for 90 days — a very long time by its own standards. Since 1949, Parliament has only once suspended a member for a longer period: a Labour lawmaker who was found in 2015 to have expressed a “willingness to purchase cocaine” and was suspended for six months as punishment.
How has Johnson responded?
Johnson released a 1,700-word statement that called the committee’s findings “rubbish” and accused its members of participating in a “protracted political assassination.”
He repeated his insistence that he always believed the gatherings in Downing Street constituted work events, meaning that — in his view — they were exempt from the coronavirus restrictions.
“I knew exactly what events I had attended in Number 10. I knew what I had seen, with my own eyes, and like the current [prime minister], I believed that these events were lawful. I believed that my participation was lawful, and required by my job,” he said in a statement, reported by local media.
Johnson also repeated his accusations that the committee’s members were politically and personally biased against him, even suggesting that his role as a key Brexit supporter made him a target. However, lawmakers from Johnson’s own Conservative Party make up a majority of the committee.
In response to similar accusations made by Johnson last week, committee members said his lashing out against their integrity and impartiality was “unacceptable.”
“This attack on a committee carrying out its remit from the democratically elected House itself amounts to an attack on our democratic institutions,” they said.
Does Johnson have a political future?
It’s too early to tell. Since leaving Parliament, he has done little to dampen speculation that some sort of political comeback could still be in the cards. “It is very sad to be leaving Parliament — at least for now,” he said last week, when announcing his resignation.
However, returning to the House of Commons would require him to win a primary contest in a new constituency — something top Conservative Party lawmakers could be reluctant to support.
Although the former prime minister has lost the support of those at the top of the party, he’s still popular among some of its lawmakers and large sections of its core voters — many of whom are vocally dissatisfied with Rishi Sunak’s premiership.
On Thursday, Johnson’s parliamentary allies flooded social media with ‘Back Boris’ messages. “I believed Boris before and I believe him today,” said one lawmaker, who described the punishment as “extraordinary to the point of sheer vindictiveness.” Another Conservative lawmaker said he was “appalled.”
In contrast, Downing Street refused to offer any judgment on Thursday’s report. “In line with proper process, it’s now for the House … to consider its findings,” a spokesperson said.
[ad_2]
Source link
